{"title":"骨水泥分布对经皮椎体增强治疗骨质疏松性骨折疗效的影响:基于mri参考标记的评估。","authors":"Ruigang Jia, Dong Li, Peng He, Xin-Qiang Wang, Yunpeng Zhang, Jianling Bai, Jiwei Tian","doi":"10.2106/JBJS.23.01289","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>No studies have evaluated the impact of the cement distribution as classified on the basis of the fracture bone marrow edema area (FBMEA) in magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) on the efficacy of percutaneous vertebral augmentation (PVA) for acute osteoporotic vertebral fractures.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The clinical data of patients with acute, painful, single-level thoracolumbar osteoporotic fractures were retrospectively analyzed. The bone cement distribution on the postoperative radiograph was divided into 4 types according to the distribution of the FBMEA on the preoperative MRI. The primary outcomes were the postoperative visual analog scale (VAS) for pain and Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) scores. Cement leakage, adjacent vertebral fractures (an important concern in complications after vertebroplasty and a subset of new fractures), and recollapse of the treated vertebra were also evaluated.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 128 patients, 80.5% of whom were female, were included and had follow-up for 24 months. The mean patient age (and standard deviation) was 74.2 ± 8.6 years. The cement distribution was classified as Type I in 18 patients, Type II in 26, Type III in 46, and Type IV in 38. At the primary time point (6 months), there was a significant difference in the ODI score favoring the Type-III and Type-IV groups compared with the Type-I and Type-II groups (adjusted 95% confidence interval [CI]: Type I versus Type II, -2.40 to 4.50; Type I versus Type III, 1.35 to 7.63; Type I versus Type IV, 1.27 to 7.92; Type II versus Type III, 0.67 to 6.21; Type II versus Type IV, 0.63 to 6.46; adjusted p < 0.0083), whereas no significant differences were found between the 4 groups in the VAS pain score. The Type-II and Type-IV groups had a higher incidence of cement leakage, and the Type-III and Type-IV groups had a lower incidence of vertebral recollapse.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>An adequate distribution of bone cement is advantageous for functional improvement, short-term pain relief, and a lower rate of vertebral recollapse. The FBMEA appears to be a feasible reference marker for evaluating the performance of the PVA procedure.</p><p><strong>Level of evidence: </strong>Therapeutic Level III. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.</p>","PeriodicalId":15273,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery, American Volume","volume":"107 2","pages":"196-207"},"PeriodicalIF":4.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Impact of Cement Distribution on the Efficacy of Percutaneous Vertebral Augmentation for Osteoporotic Fractures: Assessment with an MRI-Based Reference Marker.\",\"authors\":\"Ruigang Jia, Dong Li, Peng He, Xin-Qiang Wang, Yunpeng Zhang, Jianling Bai, Jiwei Tian\",\"doi\":\"10.2106/JBJS.23.01289\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>No studies have evaluated the impact of the cement distribution as classified on the basis of the fracture bone marrow edema area (FBMEA) in magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) on the efficacy of percutaneous vertebral augmentation (PVA) for acute osteoporotic vertebral fractures.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The clinical data of patients with acute, painful, single-level thoracolumbar osteoporotic fractures were retrospectively analyzed. The bone cement distribution on the postoperative radiograph was divided into 4 types according to the distribution of the FBMEA on the preoperative MRI. The primary outcomes were the postoperative visual analog scale (VAS) for pain and Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) scores. Cement leakage, adjacent vertebral fractures (an important concern in complications after vertebroplasty and a subset of new fractures), and recollapse of the treated vertebra were also evaluated.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 128 patients, 80.5% of whom were female, were included and had follow-up for 24 months. The mean patient age (and standard deviation) was 74.2 ± 8.6 years. The cement distribution was classified as Type I in 18 patients, Type II in 26, Type III in 46, and Type IV in 38. At the primary time point (6 months), there was a significant difference in the ODI score favoring the Type-III and Type-IV groups compared with the Type-I and Type-II groups (adjusted 95% confidence interval [CI]: Type I versus Type II, -2.40 to 4.50; Type I versus Type III, 1.35 to 7.63; Type I versus Type IV, 1.27 to 7.92; Type II versus Type III, 0.67 to 6.21; Type II versus Type IV, 0.63 to 6.46; adjusted p < 0.0083), whereas no significant differences were found between the 4 groups in the VAS pain score. The Type-II and Type-IV groups had a higher incidence of cement leakage, and the Type-III and Type-IV groups had a lower incidence of vertebral recollapse.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>An adequate distribution of bone cement is advantageous for functional improvement, short-term pain relief, and a lower rate of vertebral recollapse. The FBMEA appears to be a feasible reference marker for evaluating the performance of the PVA procedure.</p><p><strong>Level of evidence: </strong>Therapeutic Level III. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":15273,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery, American Volume\",\"volume\":\"107 2\",\"pages\":\"196-207\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-01-15\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery, American Volume\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2106/JBJS.23.01289\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/11/21 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"ORTHOPEDICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery, American Volume","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2106/JBJS.23.01289","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/11/21 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ORTHOPEDICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
背景:目前还没有研究评估根据磁共振成像(MRI)中骨折骨髓水肿面积(FBMEA)分类的骨水泥分布对经皮椎体增强术(PVA)治疗急性骨质疏松性椎体骨折疗效的影响。方法:回顾性分析急性疼痛性单节段胸腰椎骨质疏松性骨折患者的临床资料。根据术前MRI上FBMEA的分布,将术后x线片上骨水泥分布分为4种类型。主要结果为术后疼痛视觉模拟评分(VAS)和Oswestry残疾指数(ODI)评分。我们还评估了骨水泥渗漏、相邻椎体骨折(椎体成形术后并发症和一部分新骨折的一个重要问题)以及治疗后椎体的再塌陷。结果:共纳入128例患者,其中80.5%为女性,随访24个月。患者平均年龄(及标准差)为74.2±8.6岁。18例患者的骨水泥分布为I型,26例为II型,46例为III型,38例为IV型。在主要时间点(6个月),与I型和II型组相比,iii型和iv型组的ODI评分有显著差异(调整95%置信区间[CI]: I型与II型,-2.40至4.50;I型vs III型,1.35 vs 7.63;I型vs IV型,1.27 vs 7.92;II型vs III型,0.67 ~ 6.21;II型vs . IV型,0.63 ~ 6.46;经校正p < 0.0083),而4组间VAS疼痛评分无显著差异。ii型和iv型组骨水泥渗漏发生率较高,iii型和iv型组椎体再塌陷发生率较低。结论:骨水泥的适当分布有利于功能改善、短期疼痛缓解和降低椎体再溃率。FBMEA似乎是评估PVA程序性能的可行参考指标。证据等级:治疗性III级。有关证据水平的完整描述,请参见作者说明。
Impact of Cement Distribution on the Efficacy of Percutaneous Vertebral Augmentation for Osteoporotic Fractures: Assessment with an MRI-Based Reference Marker.
Background: No studies have evaluated the impact of the cement distribution as classified on the basis of the fracture bone marrow edema area (FBMEA) in magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) on the efficacy of percutaneous vertebral augmentation (PVA) for acute osteoporotic vertebral fractures.
Methods: The clinical data of patients with acute, painful, single-level thoracolumbar osteoporotic fractures were retrospectively analyzed. The bone cement distribution on the postoperative radiograph was divided into 4 types according to the distribution of the FBMEA on the preoperative MRI. The primary outcomes were the postoperative visual analog scale (VAS) for pain and Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) scores. Cement leakage, adjacent vertebral fractures (an important concern in complications after vertebroplasty and a subset of new fractures), and recollapse of the treated vertebra were also evaluated.
Results: A total of 128 patients, 80.5% of whom were female, were included and had follow-up for 24 months. The mean patient age (and standard deviation) was 74.2 ± 8.6 years. The cement distribution was classified as Type I in 18 patients, Type II in 26, Type III in 46, and Type IV in 38. At the primary time point (6 months), there was a significant difference in the ODI score favoring the Type-III and Type-IV groups compared with the Type-I and Type-II groups (adjusted 95% confidence interval [CI]: Type I versus Type II, -2.40 to 4.50; Type I versus Type III, 1.35 to 7.63; Type I versus Type IV, 1.27 to 7.92; Type II versus Type III, 0.67 to 6.21; Type II versus Type IV, 0.63 to 6.46; adjusted p < 0.0083), whereas no significant differences were found between the 4 groups in the VAS pain score. The Type-II and Type-IV groups had a higher incidence of cement leakage, and the Type-III and Type-IV groups had a lower incidence of vertebral recollapse.
Conclusions: An adequate distribution of bone cement is advantageous for functional improvement, short-term pain relief, and a lower rate of vertebral recollapse. The FBMEA appears to be a feasible reference marker for evaluating the performance of the PVA procedure.
Level of evidence: Therapeutic Level III. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.
期刊介绍:
The Journal of Bone & Joint Surgery (JBJS) has been the most valued source of information for orthopaedic surgeons and researchers for over 125 years and is the gold standard in peer-reviewed scientific information in the field. A core journal and essential reading for general as well as specialist orthopaedic surgeons worldwide, The Journal publishes evidence-based research to enhance the quality of care for orthopaedic patients. Standards of excellence and high quality are maintained in everything we do, from the science of the content published to the customer service we provide. JBJS is an independent, non-profit journal.