Impact of nonoperative treatment, vertebroplasty, and kyphoplasty on survival and morbidity after vertebral compression fracture in the medicare population

Long Term Survival of Pathological Thoracolumbar Fractures Treated with Vertebroplasty: Analysis Using a Nationwide Insurance Claim Database

Background: There are still debates on the long-term outcome of treating pathological thoracolumbar fractures, including osteoporosis and oncologic problems, using vertebroplasty. Methods: We collected 8625 patients with pathological thoracolumbar fractures (ICD-9-CM codes 733.13 combined with 805.2 or 805.4) between the years of 2003 to 2013, from the two million random samples from the National Health Insurance Research Database in Taiwan. Survival analysis was conducted to estimate the mortality risks of different treatments, including vertebroplasty (n = 1389), conventional open surgery (n = 1219), or conservative treatment (n = 6017). A multivariable Cox proportional hazard model was constructed for adjustment of age, gender, comorbidities and complications. Results: Crude incidence rate of patients with pathological thoracolumbar fractures in Taiwan gradually increased year by year. Compared with conservative treatment, conventional open surgery and vertebroplasty seemed to improve long-term survival with adjusted hazard ratios (aHR) of 0.80 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.70–0.93), and 0.87 (95% CI 0.77–0.99), respectively. The survival advantage of vertebroplasty appeared more evident for those aged over 75. However, we were unable to rule out confounding by indication. Conclusion: Although conventional open surgery would usually be the best choice for the treatment of patients with pathological thoracolumbar fractures, database information from current real-world practice appears to support vertebroplasty as a viable choice for elderly people over 75 years of age.

Postoperative Clinical Outcomes of Balloon Kyphoplasty Treatment: Would Adherence to Indications and Contraindications Prevent Complications?

Study Design

We retrospectively assessed the postoperative clinical outcomes of balloon kyphoplasty (BKP).

Purpose

To evaluate the risk factors for complications and to reconfirm the indications and contraindications for BKP.

Overview of Literature

In Japan, BKP is indicated for cases of osteoporotic vertebral fractures when pain is not improved even after an adequate period of conservative treatment. Contraindications to BKP include pedicle fracture, fracture of a flat vertebra, or fracture of the posterior wall of the vertebral body diagnosed on computed tomography.

Methods

Seventy-five patients who underwent BKP in our institution participated in this study; 49 provided follow-up data. Those with complications and persistent pain were assigned to the “eventful” group; the others, to the “uneventful” group. We evaluated risk factors for complications and persistent pain, including the presence or absence of severe posterior wall injury/pedicle fracture, the shape of the vertebral body, and the time period from onset of pain to BKP.

Results

The incidences of severe posterior wall injury, pedicle fracture, and flattened vertebral body did not differ significantly between the uneventful and eventful groups. However, there was a significant difference in disease duration between those with and those without adjacent vertebral fractures (AVFs): The incidence of AVF was lower among patients with disease of less than 8 weeks’ duration.

Conclusions

Disease duration is a possible risk factor for developing AVF, whereas other characteristics were not risk factors for complications after BKP. Although it has been suggested that BKP treatment in the early phase after injury results in a good outcome, the indications should be determined according to prognosis that is based on findings obtained with tools such as imaging examinations.

A Review and Clinical Perspective of the Impact of Osteoporosis on the Spine

Introduction

Osteopenia and osteoporosis are common conditions in the United States. The health consequences of low bone density can be dire, from poor surgical outcomes to increased mortality rates following a fracture.

Significance

This article highlights the impact low bone density has on spine health in terms of vertebral fragility fractures and its adverse effects on elective spine surgery. It also reviews the clinical importance of bone health assessment and optimization.

Results

Vertebral fractures are the most common fragility fractures with significant consequences related to patient morbidity and mortality. Additionally, a vertebral fracture is the best predictor of a subsequent fracture. These fractures constitute sentinel events in osteoporosis that require further evaluation and treatment of the patient's underlying bone disease. In addition to fractures, osteopenia and osteoporosis have deleterious effects on elective spine surgery from screw pullout to fusion rates. Adequate evaluation and treatment of a patient's underlying bone disease in these situations have been shown to improve patient outcomes.

Conclusion

With an increased understanding of the prevalence of low bone mass and its consequences as well an understanding of how to identify these patients and appropriately intervene, spine surgeons can effectively decrease the rates of adverse health outcomes related to low bone mass.

Long-term safety and clinical performance of kyphoplasty and SpineJack® procedures in the treatment of osteoporotic vertebral compression fractures: a pilot, monocentric, investigator-initiated study

This pilot monocenter study in 30 patients with painful osteoporotic vertebral compression fractures compared two vertebral augmentation procedures. Over a 3-year post-surgery follow-up, pain/disability/quality of life remained significantly improved with both balloon kyphoplasty and SpineJack® techniques, but the latter allowed better vertebral body height restoration/kyphosis correction.

INTRODUCTION

Patient follow-up rarely exceed 2 years in trials comparing vertebral augmentation procedures for the treatment of painful osteoporotic vertebral compression fractures (VCFs). This pilot, investigator-initiated, prospective study aimed to compare long-term results of SpineJack® (SJ) and balloon kyphoplasty (BKP). Preliminary results showed that SJ resulted in a better restoration of vertebral heights and angles, maintained over 12 months.

METHODS

Thirty patients were randomized to SJ (n = 15) or BKP (n = 15). Clinical endpoints were analgesic consumption, back pain intensity (visual analog scale (VAS)), the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), and quality of life (EQ-VAS score). They were recorded preoperatively, at 5 days (except EQ-VAS), 1, 3, 6, 12, and 36 months post-surgery. Spine X-rays were taken 48 h prior to the procedure and 5 days, 6, 12, and 36 months after.

RESULTS

Clinical improvements were observed with both procedures over the 3-year period without significant inter-group differences, but the final mean EQ-5D_index score was significantly in favor of the SJ group (0.93 ± 0.11 vs 0.81 ± 0.09; p = 0.007). Vertebral height restoration/kyphotic correction was still evident at 36 months with a greater mean correction of anterior (10 ± 13% vs 2 ± 8% for BKP, p = 0.007) and central height (10 ± 11% vs 3 ± 7% for BKP, p = 0.034) and a larger correction of the vertebral body angle (- 5.0° ± 5.1° vs 0.4° ± 3.4°; p = 0.003) for SJ group.

CONCLUSIONS

In this study, both techniques displayed very good long-term clinical efficiency and safety in patients with osteoporotic VCFs. Over the 3-year follow-up, vertebral body height restoration/kyphosis correction was better with the SpineJack® procedure.

ISASS Policy 2018-Vertebral Augmentation: Coverage Indications, Limitations, and/or Medical Necessity

The ISASS Policy Statement on vertebral augmentation has the objectives to provide a background and an update with the latest clinical evidence for the international spine community. A SpineLine Panel Review (2010) appropriately recommended an exploration of "the seeming disconnect between the conclusions of … two [Level I] PRCT's and previous experience and data" regarding vertebral augmentation. ISASS responded by supporting a comprehensive meta-analysis to help frame a cogent historical analysis of vertebral augmentation. This ISASS Policy 2018 is based on a thorough literature search for relevant studies, including systematic reviews and meta-analyses, that are subjected to thorough quality appraisal for the purpose of informing public opinion and decision making. Given the abundance of high-quality information, ISASS can confidently advocate that there is strong support for vertebral augmentation in the treatment of symptomatic vertebral compression fractures.

Percutaneous Vertebral Augmentation for Osteoporotic Vertebral Compression Fracture in the Midthoracic Vertebrae (T5-8): A Retrospective Study of 101 Patients with 111 Fractured Segments

OBJECTIVE

Data reporting percutaneous vertebroplasty (PVP) or percutaneous balloon kyphoplasty (PKP) application to the midthoracic vertebrae remain limited. This study aimed to summarize our experiences and explore the efficacy and safety of PVP or PKP in dealing with osteoporotic vertebral compression fracture (OVCF) in the midthoracic vertebrae.

METHODS

Patients receiving PVP or PKP for midthoracic OVCF in our institution from January 2015 to January 2018 were retrospectively enrolled. All patients were grouped according to cement augmentation procedure types, surgical approaches, and puncture routes. All patients underwent a postoperative follow-up of 2-36 months. Visual analog scale (VAS) and ECOG Scale of Performance Status scores were evaluated pre- and postoperatively. Cement distribution and rate of cement leakage were assessed by radiographs. Associations of these variables and clinical scores and radiographic indices were analyzed.

RESULTS

A total of 101 consecutive patients with 111 fractured centrums were enrolled. Both VAS and ECOG Scale of Performance Status scores of all patients decreased significantly after the operation, and progressively decreased at the final follow-up. The cement distribution of the bipedicular group was significantly better than the unipedicular group, but the total leakage rate of the former (71.7%) was significantly higher than the latter (43.1%). The rate of epidural cement leakage in the PKP group (5.4%) was significantly lower than that of the PVP group (20.3%), whereas the left puncture group (28.6%) was significantly higher than that of the right puncture group (2.7%).

CONCLUSIONS

PKP and a bipedicular approach can help improve cement distribution and reduce the epidural cement leakage rate and therefore should be preferred over PVP or a unipedicular approach in OVCF of the midthoracic vertebrae.

Percutaneous vertebroplasty for osteoporotic vertebral compression fracture

BACKGROUND

Percutaneous vertebroplasty remains widely used to treat osteoporotic vertebral fractures although our 2015 Cochrane review did not support its role in routine practice.

OBJECTIVES

To update the available evidence of the benefits and harms of vertebroplasty for treatment of osteoporotic vertebral fractures.

SEARCH METHODS

We updated the search of CENTRAL, MEDLINE and Embase and trial registries to 15 November 2017.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised and quasi-randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of adults with painful osteoporotic vertebral fractures, comparing vertebroplasty with placebo (sham), usual care, or another intervention. As it is least prone to bias, vertebroplasty compared with placebo was the primary comparison. Major outcomes were mean overall pain, disability, disease-specific and overall health-related quality of life, patient-reported treatment success, new symptomatic vertebral fractures and number of other serious adverse events.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard methodologic procedures expected by Cochrane.

MAIN RESULTS

Twenty-one trials were included: five compared vertebroplasty with placebo (541 randomised participants), eight with usual care (1136 randomised participants), seven with kyphoplasty (968 randomised participants) and one compared vertebroplasty with facet joint glucocorticoid injection (217 randomised participants). Trial size varied from 46 to 404 participants, most participants were female, mean age ranged between 62.6 and 81 years, and mean symptom duration varied from a week to more than six months.Four placebo-controlled trials were at low risk of bias and one was possibly susceptible to performance and detection bias. Other trials were at risk of bias for several criteria, most notably due to lack of participant and personnel blinding.Compared with placebo, high- to moderate-quality evidence from five trials indicates that vertebroplasty provides no clinically important benefits with respect to pain, disability, disease-specific or overall quality of life or treatment success at one month. Evidence for quality of life and treatment success was downgraded due to possible imprecision. Evidence was not downgraded for potential publication bias as only one placebo-controlled trial remains unreported. Mean pain (on a scale zero to 10, higher scores indicate more pain) was five points with placebo and 0.7 points better (0.3 better to 1.2 better) with vertebroplasty, an absolute pain reduction of 7% (3% better to 12% better, minimal clinical important difference is 15%) and relative reduction of 10% (4% better to 17% better) (five trials, 535 participants). Mean disability measured by the Roland-Morris Disability Questionnaire (scale range zero to 23, higher scores indicate worse disability) was 14.2 points in the placebo group and 1.5 points better (0.4 better to 2.6 better) in the vertebroplasty group, absolute improvement 7% (2% to 11% better), relative improvement 9% better (2% to 15% better) (four trials, 472 participants).Disease-specific quality of life measured by the Quality of Life Questionnaire of the European Foundation for Osteoporosis (QUALEFFO) (scale zero to 100, higher scores indicating worse quality of life) was 62 points in the placebo group and 2.3 points better (1.4 points worse to 6.7 points better), an absolute imrovement of 2% (1% worse to 6% better); relative improvement 4% better (2% worse to 10% better) (three trials, 351 participants). Overall quality of life (European Quality of Life (EQ5D), zero = death to 1 = perfect health, higher scores indicate greater quality of life) was 0.38 points in the placebo group and 0.05 points better (0.01 better to 0.09 better) in the vertebroplasty group, absolute improvement: 5% (1% to 9% better), relative improvement: 18% (4% to 32% better) (three trials, 285 participants). In one trial (78 participants), 9/40 (or 225 per 1000) people perceived that treatment was successful in the placebo group compared with 12/38 (or 315 per 1000; 95% CI 150 to 664) in the vertebroplasty group, RR 1.40 (95% CI 0.67 to 2.95), absolute difference: 9% more reported success (11% fewer to 29% more); relative change: 40% more reported success (33% fewer to 195% more).Low-quality evidence (downgraded due to imprecision and potential for bias from the usual-care controlled trials) indicates uncertainty around the risk estimates of harms with vertebroplasty. The incidence of new symptomatic vertebral fractures (from six trials) was 48/418 (95 per 1000; range 34 to 264)) in the vertebroplasty group compared with 31/422 (73 per 1000) in the control group; RR 1.29 (95% CI 0.46 to 3.62)). The incidence of other serious adverse events (five trials) was 16/408 (34 per 1000, range 18 to 62) in the vertebroplasty group compared with 23/413 (56 per 1000) in the control group; RR 0.61 (95% CI 0.33 to 1.10). Notably, serious adverse events reported with vertebroplasty included osteomyelitis, cord compression, thecal sac injury and respiratory failure.Our subgroup analyses indicate that the effects did not differ according to duration of pain (acute versus subacute). Including data from the eight trials that compared vertebroplasty with usual care in a sensitivity analyses altered the primary results, with all combined analyses displaying considerable heterogeneity.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

We found high- to moderate-quality evidence that vertebroplasty has no important benefit in terms of pain, disability, quality of life or treatment success in the treatment of acute or subacute osteoporotic vertebral fractures in routine practice when compared with a sham procedure. Results were consistent across the studies irrespective of the average duration of pain.Sensitivity analyses confirmed that open trials comparing vertebroplasty with usual care are likely to have overestimated any benefit of vertebroplasty. Correcting for these biases would likely drive any benefits observed with vertebroplasty towards the null, in keeping with findings from the placebo-controlled trials.Numerous serious adverse events have been observed following vertebroplasty. However due to the small number of events, we cannot be certain about whether or not vertebroplasty results in a clinically important increased risk of new symptomatic vertebral fractures and/or other serious adverse events. Patients should be informed about both the high- to moderate-quality evidence that shows no important benefit of vertebroplasty and its potential for harm.

The Effect of Kyphoplasty on Mortality in Symptomatic Vertebral Compression Fractures: A Review

Background

Vertebral compression fractures (VCFs) are common comorbidities encountered in the elderly, and they are on the rise. Kyphoplasty may be superior in VCF management compared with conservative management. A comprehensive review of literature was conducted, focusing on the effect of kyphoplasty on mortality and overall survivorship in patients with a diagnosis of symptomatic VCFs.

Methods

A comprehensive literature search was conducted to find recently published literature on kyphoplasty effects on mortality using the following keywords: "kyphoplasty," "mortality," "morbidity," "vertebral compression fractures," and "survivorship." We only included articles that listed one of their primary or secondary outcomes as morbidity and mortality after a kyphoplasty procedure in VCF patients.

Results

Of 27 articles, only 6 articles met the inclusion criteria. Studies have reported that surgical procedures have decreased the mortality rate in symptomatic VCF patients. Four studies concluded that the mortality rate was lower after kyphoplasty compared with vertebroplasty and nonoperative treatments. One study reported there was no significant difference between kyphoplasty and nonoperative management. One study summarized that the mortality rate was not significantly different between kyphoplasty and vertebroplasty.

Conclusions

Multicenter prospective and randomized control studies are required to fully evaluate the decreasing trend of mortality rates after a kyphoplasty procedure.

Therapeutic effects of new-type hydraulic delivery vertebroplasty, balloon kyphoplasty and conventional pusher-type vertebroplasty on single segmental osteoporotic vertebral compression fracture

This study aims to evaluate safety and practicality in clinical application for better guidance of single segmental osteoporotic vertebral compression fractures treatment. From May 2012 to September 2013, a total of 188 cases of patients with fractures, who received different treatment, were incorporated in the study and then divided into: group A (n=59), conventional pusher-type vertebroplasty; group B (n=54), balloon kyphoplasty; group C (n=60), new-type hydraulic delivery vertebroplasty treatment. The overall follow-up rate was 92.02%. Postoperative visual analogue scale (VAS) and Oswestry disability index (ODI) scores were significantly improved more than those of the preoperative scores in the three groups. Bone cement injection volumes in group A were significantly lower than those in group B and group C. Vertebral height recovery rates among groups were obviously different, showing statistical significance. After a year of follow-up, the vertebral height recovery outcome in group A was obviously poorer than that in group B and group C. A poorer outcome in group B was also found when compared with group C. In addition, the vertebral height restoration had a certain degree of loss, with the loss rate of 20.5, 14.0 and 7.5% in the three groups, respectively. Three operation methods have equivalent effects in the improvement of symptoms and functional recovery. Therefore, the new-type hydraulic delivery vertebroplasty provides a relatively more concise operation and shorter operation time, displaying more outstanding performance of clinical efficacy in spinal reconstruction and reduction of complications risks by evaluating the diffusion of the bone cement, vertebral height restoration rate and postoperative complications.

Does a fracture liaison service program minimize recurrent fragility fractures in the elderly with osteoporotic vertebral compression fractures?

BACKGROUND

There is a sizable proportion of elderly, both men and women, with fragility fractures, approximately 2 million fractures per year in the United States.

METHODS

A retrospective chart review of 365 patient presented between January 2012 and December 2017 with vertebral compression fractures. Pre-post study design to determine refracture between Group A (before Fracture Liaison Service (FLS)) and Group B, after. Calcium, Vitamin D, DEXA scans, FRAX scores, and refracture rates were measured.

RESULTS

Mean age for group A and B were 79.0 and 74.9 years, respectively, and predominantly females. Serum calcium was higher in group B (9.51 mg/d/L versus 9.40 mg/dL) but not significant (p = 0.19). Fracture score among the groups was similar (20% versus 22%; p = 0.44). The total refracture rate for both vertebral and other fracture was significantly less in the post FLS patients, 36.5% versus 56% p-value = 0.01.

CONCLUSION

FLS program benefited patients with fragility fractures by decreasing the incidence of all refracture rates.

Review of Vertebral Augmentation: An Updated Meta-analysis of the Effectiveness

Background

To update vertebral augmentation literature by comparing outcomes between vertebroplasty (VP), balloon kyphoplasty (BKP), vertebral augmentation with implant (VAI), and nonsurgical management (NSM) for treating vertebral compression fractures (VCFs).

Methods

A PubMed literature search was conducted with keywords kyphoplasty, vertebroplasty, vertebral body stent, and vertebral augmentation AND implant for English-language articles from February 1, 2011, to November 22, 2016. Among the results, 25 met the inclusion criteria for the meta-analysis. Inclusion criteria were prospective comparative studies for mid-/lower-thoracic and lumbar VCFs enrolling at least 20 patients. Exclusion criteria included studies that were single arm, systematic reviews and meta-analyses, traumatic nonosteoporotic or cancer-related fractures, lack of clinical outcomes, or non-Level I and non-Level II studies. Standardized mean difference between baseline and end point for each outcome was calculated, and treatment groups were pooled using random effects meta-analysis.

Results

Visual analog scale pain reduction for BKP and VP was -4.05 and -3.88, respectively. VP was better than but not significantly different from NSM (-2.66), yet BKP showed significant improvement from both NSM and VAI (-2.77). The Oswestry Disability Index reduction for BKP showed a significant improvement over VAI (P < .001). There was no significant difference in changes between BKP and VP for anterior (P = .226) and posterior (P = .293) vertebral height restoration. There was no significant difference in subsequent fractures following BKP (32.7%; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 8.8%-56.6%) or VP (28.3%; 95% CI: 7.0%-49.7%) compared with NSM (15.9%; 95% CI: 5.2%-26.6%).

Conclusions/Level of Evidence

Based on Level I and II studies, BKP had significantly better and VP tended to have better pain reduction compared with NSM. BKP tended to have better height restoration than VP. Additionally, BKP had significant improvements in pain reduction and disability score as compared with VAI.

Clinical Relevance

This meta-analysis serves to further define and support the safety and efficacy of vertebral augmentation.

Kyphoplasty patient-centered outcomes via questionnaire

Background

To assess patient centered outcomes among adults with compression fractures treated by kyphoplasty.

Methods

A 3-question survey was administered via telephone to patients who had a kyphoplasty procedure performed from 2008-2011.

Results

One hundred fifty-one patients completed the telephone satisfaction survey. Of these, 95.4% of respondents said the procedure was tolerable, 82.8% had full or partial pain relief and 66.2% would have the procedure again.

Conclusions

Large randomized and observational evidence support the use of kyphoplasty in osteoporotic and malignant compression fractures. Based on our survey, patients believe kyphoplasty is a tolerable procedure that produces full or partial pain relief and would undergo the procedure again if needed.

Vertebral Fragility Fractures (VFF)-Who, when and how to operate

Vertebral Fragility Fractures (VFF) are common and lead to pain, long term disability and increased mortality. Most patients will have mild to moderate pain symptoms and can be managed conservatively. However, patients with severe pain who have minimal or no pain relief with potent analgesia, or who only achieve adequate pain relief with high doses of morphine based analgesia which results in significant adverse events, should be considered for vertebral augmentation. Ideally, for vertebral augmentation, patients should present within four months of the fracture (onset of acute pain) and have at least 3 weeks of failure of conservative treatment although early intervention may be more appropriate for hospitalised patients, who tend to be older, more frail and likely to be less tolerant to the adverse effects of conservative treatment. The Cardiovascular and Interventional Radiological Society of Europe (CIRSE) recommends Percutaneous Vertebroplasty as the first line surgical augmentation technique for VFF in older people, which has been shown to improve pain symptoms, allow early restoration of functional mobility and may reduce the risk of further vertebral collapse. CIRSE recommends percutaneous Balloon Kyphoplasty as second line treatment in VFF, although the optimal indication is for acute traumatic vertebral fractures (less than 7-10 days) in younger people. Assessment and treatment of underlying osteoporosis is important to reduce the risk of further fractures in older people with VFF.

Percutaneous vertebroplasty for osteoporotic vertebral compression fracture

BACKGROUND

Percutaneous vertebroplasty remains widely used to treat osteoporotic vertebral fractures although our 2015 Cochrane review did not support its role in routine practice.

OBJECTIVES

To update the available evidence of the benefits and harms of vertebroplasty for treatment of osteoporotic vertebral fractures.

SEARCH METHODS

We updated the search of CENTRAL, MEDLINE and Embase and trial registries to 15 November 2017.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised and quasi-randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of adults with painful osteoporotic vertebral fractures, comparing vertebroplasty with placebo (sham), usual care, or another intervention. As it is least prone to bias, vertebroplasty compared with placebo was the primary comparison. Major outcomes were mean overall pain, disability, disease-specific and overall health-related quality of life, patient-reported treatment success, new symptomatic vertebral fractures and number of other serious adverse events.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard methodologic procedures expected by Cochrane.

MAIN RESULTS

Twenty-one trials were included: five compared vertebroplasty with placebo (541 randomised participants), eight with usual care (1136 randomised participants), seven with kyphoplasty (968 randomised participants) and one compared vertebroplasty with facet joint glucocorticoid injection (217 randomised participants). Trial size varied from 46 to 404 participants, most participants were female, mean age ranged between 62.6 and 81 years, and mean symptom duration varied from a week to more than six months.Three placebo-controlled trials were at low risk of bias and two were possibly susceptible to performance and detection bias. Other trials were at risk of bias for several criteria, most notably due to lack of participant and personnel blinding.Compared with placebo, high- to moderate-quality evidence from five trials (one with incomplete data reported) indicates that vertebroplasty provides no clinically important benefits with respect to pain, disability, disease-specific or overall quality of life or treatment success at one month. Evidence for quality of life and treatment success was downgraded due to possible imprecision. Evidence was not downgraded for potential publication bias as only one placebo-controlled trial remains unreported. Mean pain (on a scale zero to 10, higher scores indicate more pain) was five points with placebo and 0.6 points better (0.2 better to 1 better) with vertebroplasty, an absolute pain reduction of 6% (2% better to 10% better, minimal clinical important difference is 15%) and relative reduction of 9% (3% better to14% better) (five trials, 535 participants). Mean disability measured by the Roland-Morris Disability Questionnaire (scale range zero to 23, higher scores indicate worse disability) was 14.2 points in the placebo group and 1.7 points better (0.3 better to 3.1 better) in the vertebroplasty group, absolute improvement 7% (1% to 14% better), relative improvement 10% better (3% to 18% better) (three trials, 296 participants).Disease-specific quality of life measured by the Quality of Life Questionnaire of the European Foundation for Osteoporosis (QUALEFFO) (scale zero to 100, higher scores indicating worse quality of life) was 62 points in the placebo group and 2.75 points (3.53 worse to 9.02 better) in the vertebroplasty group, absolute change: 3% better (4% worse to 9% better), relative change: 5% better (6% worse to 15% better (two trials, 175 participants). Overall quality of life (European Quality of Life (EQ5D), zero = death to 1 = perfect health, higher scores indicate greater quality of life) was 0.38 points in the placebo group and 0.05 points better (0.01 better to 0.09 better) in the vertebroplasty group, absolute improvement: 5% (1% to 9% better), relative improvement: 18% (4% to 32% better) (three trials, 285 participants). In one trial (78 participants), 9/40 (or 225 per 1000) people perceived that treatment was successful in the placebo group compared with 12/38 (or 315 per 1000; 95% CI 150 to 664) in the vertebroplasty group, RR 1.40 (95% CI 0.67 to 2.95), absolute difference: 9% more reported success (11% fewer to 29% more); relative change: 40% more reported success (33% fewer to 195% more).Moderate-quality evidence (low number of events) from seven trials (four placebo, three usual care, 1020 participants), up to 24 months follow-up, indicates we are uncertain whether vertebroplasty increases the risk of new symptomatic vertebral fractures (70/509 (or 130 per 1000; range 60 to 247) observed in the vertebroplasty group compared with 59/511 (120 per 1000) in the control group; RR 1.08 (95% CI 0.62 to 1.87)).Similarly, moderate-quality evidence (low number of events) from five trials (three placebo, two usual care, 821 participants), indicates uncertainty around the risk of other serious adverse events (18/408 or 76 per 1000, range 6 to 156) in the vertebroplasty group compared with 26/413 (or 106 per 1000) in the control group; RR 0.64 (95% CI 0.36 to 1.12). Notably, serious adverse events reported with vertebroplasty included osteomyelitis, cord compression, thecal sac injury and respiratory failure.Our subgroup analyses indicate that the effects did not differ according to duration of pain ≤ 6 weeks versus > 6 weeks. Including data from the eight trials that compared vertebroplasty with usual care in a sensitivity analyses altered the primary results, with all combined analyses displaying considerable heterogeneity.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Based upon high- to moderate-quality evidence, our updated review does not support a role for vertebroplasty for treating acute or subacute osteoporotic vertebral fractures in routine practice. We found no demonstrable clinically important benefits compared with placebo (sham procedure) and subgroup analyses indicated that the results did not differ according to duration of pain ≤ 6 weeks versus > 6 weeks.Sensitivity analyses confirmed that open trials comparing vertebroplasty with usual care are likely to have overestimated any benefit of vertebroplasty. Correcting for these biases would likely drive any benefits observed with vertebroplasty towards the null, in keeping with findings from the placebo-controlled trials.Numerous serious adverse events have been observed following vertebroplasty. However due to the small number of events, we cannot be certain about whether or not vertebroplasty results in a clinically important increased risk of new symptomatic vertebral fractures and/or other serious adverse events. Patients should be informed about both the high- to moderate-quality evidence that shows no important benefit of vertebroplasty and its potential for harm.

Were VCF patients at higher risk of mortality following the 2009 publication of the vertebroplasty "sham" trials?

The 5-year period following 2009 saw a steep reduction in vertebral augmentation volume and was associated with elevated mortality risk in vertebral compression fracture (VCF) patients. The risk of mortality following a VCF diagnosis was 85.1% at 10 years and was found to be lower for balloon kyphoplasty (BKP) and vertebroplasty (VP) patients.

INTRODUCTION

BKP and VP are associated with lower mortality risks than non-surgical management (NSM) of VCF. VP versus sham trials published in 2009 sparked controversy over its effectiveness, leading to diminished referral volumes. We hypothesized that lower BKP/VP utilization would lead to a greater mortality risk for VCF patients.

METHODS

BKP/VP utilization was evaluated for VCF patients in the 100% US Medicare data set (2005-2014). Survival and morbidity were analyzed by the Kaplan-Meier method and compared between NSM, BKP, and VP using Cox regression with adjustment by propensity score and various factors.

RESULTS

The cohort included 261,756 BKP (12.6%) and 117,232 VP (5.6%) patients, comprising 20% of the VCF patient population in 2005, peaking at 24% in 2007-2008, and declining to 14% in 2014. The propensity-adjusted mortality risk for VCF patients was 4% (95% CI, 3-4%; p < 0.001) greater in 2010-2014 versus 2005-2009. The 10-year risk of mortality for the overall cohort was 85.1%. BKP and VP cohorts had a 19% (95% CI, 19-19%; p < 0.001) and 7% (95% CI, 7-8%; p < 0.001) lower propensity-adjusted 10-year mortality risk than the NSM cohort, respectively. The BKP cohort had a 13% (95% CI, 12-13%; p < 0.001) lower propensity-adjusted 10-year mortality risk than the VP cohort.

CONCLUSIONS

Changes in treatment patterns following the 2009 VP publications led to fewer augmentation procedures. In turn, the 5-year period following 2009 was associated with elevated mortality risk in VCF patients. This provides insight into the implications of treatment pattern changes and associated mortality risks.

Characteristics and outcomes of hospitalised patients with vertebral fragility fractures: a systematic review

Background

the complex management for patients presenting to hospital with vertebral fragility fractures provides justification for the development of specific services for them. A systematic review was undertaken to determine the incidence of hospital admission, patient characteristics and health outcomes of vertebral fragility fracture patients to inform the development of such a service.

Methods

non-randomised studies of vertebral fragility fracture in hospital were included. Searches were conducted using electronic databases and citation searching of the included papers.

Results

a total of 19 studies were included. The incidence of hospital admission varied from 2.8 to 19.3 per 10,000/year. The average patient age was 81 years, the majority having presented with a fall. A diagnosis of osteoporosis or previous fragility fracture was reported in around one-third of patients. Most patients (75% men and 78% women) had five or more co-pathologies. Most patients were managed non-operatively with a median hospital length of stay of 10 days. One-third of patients were started on osteoporosis treatment. Inpatient and 1-year mortality was between 0.9 and 3.5%, and 20 and 27%, respectively, between 34 and 50% were discharged from hospital to a care facility. Many patients were more dependent with activities of daily living on discharge compared to their pre-admission level. Older age and increasing comorbidities was associated with longer hospital stay and higher mortality.

Conclusion

these findings indicate that specific hospital services for patients with vertebral fragility fractures should take into consideration local hospitalisation rates for the condition, and should be multifaceted-providing access to diagnostic, therapeutic, surgical and rehabilitation interventions.

Mortality following benign sacral insufficiency fracture and associated risk factors

This study demonstrated increased mortality following sacral insufficiency fractures as with other major osteoporotic fractures. The 6-month mortality rate was 9.8%, the 1-year mortality rate was 17.5%, and the 3-year mortality rate was 25.5%. Sex- and age-adjusted standardized mortality ratio increased after fractures.

INTRODUCTION

There are no data about mortality after sacral insufficiency fractures. The purposes of this study were to investigate the mortality rate among sacral insufficiency fracture patients and to identify risk factors associated with mortality.

METHODS

This is a retrospective cohort study of patients diagnosed with sacral insufficiency fracture via radiological exam in a single institute from 2001 to 2014, excluding patients with pathological sacral fracture due to metastasis or primary tumor. Mortality and its predisposing factors were analyzed based on a review of electronic medical records and mortality data provided by the Korean Statistical Information Service. Kaplan-Meier survival analysis and Cox regression analysis were used for statistical analysis.

RESULTS

A total of 325 patients were included (275 women and 50 men). The mean age at the time of diagnosis was 69.4 years. One hundred and forty patients (43.1%) had a history of malignancy, and 71 patients (21.8%) had undergone pelvic radiation therapy before fracture diagnosis. Twenty-one patients (6.5%) underwent sacroplasty, and the others underwent conservative management after fracture diagnosis. The mean follow-up was 51.5 months, and a total of 101 patients died at the final follow-up. The 6-month mortality rate was 9.8%, the 1-year mortality rate was 17.5%, and the 3-year mortality rate was 25.5%. Sex- and age-adjusted standardized mortality ratio (SMR) increased after fractures. The overall SMR is 8.9 at 3 months decreasing to 4.5 at 2 years. Multivariable Cox regression analysis showed that significant factors associated with increased mortality were male gender, malignancy history, lumbosacral fusion with distal fusion level S1, stroke history, low total femur bone mineral density score, and low body mass index.

CONCLUSIONS

Like other types of osteoporotic fractures, sacral insufficiency fractures are associated with increased mortality.

Osteoporosis associated vertebral fractures-Health economic implications

Introduction

Osteoporosis-associated vertebral fractures represent an increasing clinical and public health problem, one with important socioeconomic effects within western countries.

The purpose of this study was to analyse demographic, medical, gender and socioeconomic aspects of osteoporotic vertebral fractures of the thoracic or lumbar spine over a period of at least 10-years.

Material and methods

Included for analysis were 694 patients who had suffered a vertebral fracture due to primary or secondary osteoporosis, and who were treated at our Level-I trauma center between 2000 and 2013. Collected data included demographic, medical and socioeconomic aspects.

Results

Clinical results revealed that 669 patients (96%) were treated conservatively. The remaining 25 patients (4%) underwent surgical therapy: 4 were treated with vertebroplasty, 15 with kyphoplasty and 6 patients with posterior stabilization. The mean age was 75.6 years (range: 50–98), with the vast majority of patients being female (n = 515). A statistically significant demographic difference (i.e., increase) in fractures was observed between the age groups 60–69 and 70–79 (p = 0.041). Concerning socioeconomic aspects, statistical analysis showed that the number of sick leaves and the need for professional domestic help was higher in female patients. Concerning treatment costs, statistical analysis did not reveal any significant differences between female and male patients.

Conclusion

Significant gender differences–to the detriment of the female population–could be demonstrated within this study. A regrettably low rate of adequate treatment after diagnosis of osteoporosis and its associated fractures–specifically relating to primary and secondary prevention–could also be identified. To prospectively avoid complications and consequential cost increases, more awareness of the necessity for prevention, early diagnosis and adequate treatment of osteoporosis and its related fractures should be considered.

The efficacy of a percutaneous expandable titanium device in anatomical reduction of vertebral compression fractures of the thoracolumbar spine

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the feasibility of a minimally invasive technique using a titanium expandable device to achieve anatomical restoration of vertebral compression fractures (VCF) of the thoracolumbar spine.

METHODS

This prospective study included 27 patients diagnosed with VCF (Magerl classification A.1.2, A.1.3, and A.3.1) of the thoracolumbar spine treated with percutaneous cement augmentation using the SpineJack® device. The study was conducted in Valladolid University Hospital, Valladolid, Spain from January to December 2012, with a minimum one-year follow up. Preoperative evaluation included visual analogue scale (VAS) for pain, and radiological assessment of the VCF using 3-dimensional computed tomography (3D-CT) scans for measurements of vertebral heights and angles. The patients were followed at 3, 6, and 12 months with clinical VAS and radiological assessments.

RESULTS

The procedure was performed in 27 patients with a mean age of 55.9 ± 17.3 years, 55.6% females. All patients underwent surgery within 6 weeks from time of injury. No procedure related complications occurred. Pain measured by VAS score decreased from 7.0 preoperatively to 3.2 within 24 hours, and remained 2.2 at 3 months, 2.1 at 6 months, and 1.5 at 12-months follow-up (p&lt;0.05). Mean height restorations for the anterior was 3.56 mm, central was 2.49, and posterior vertebral was 1.28 mm, and maintained at 12-months follow-up (p=0.001).

CONCLUSION

This new percutaneous technique for VCF has shown good clinical results in pain control and the possibility to reduce both vertebral kyphosis angles and fractured endplates seen in 3D-CT scans assessment method. Further studies are needed to confirm those results on larger cohorts with long-term follow up. 

Increased sagittal vertical axis is associated with less effective control of acute pain following vertebroplasty

OBJECTIVES

Although vertebroplasty is very effective for relieving acute pain from an osteoporotic vertebral compression fracture, not all patients who undergo vertebroplasty receive the same degree of benefit from the procedure. In order to identify the ideal candidate for vertebroplasty, pre-operative prognostic demographic or clinico-radiological factors need to be identified. The objective of this study was to identify the pre-operative prognostic factors related to the effect of vertebroplasty on acute pain control using a cohort of surgically and non-surgically managed patients.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Patients with single-level acute osteoporotic vertebral compression fracture at thoracolumbar junction (T10 to L2) were followed. If the patients were not satisfied with acute pain reduction after a three-week conservative treatment, vertebroplasty was recommended. Pain assessment was carried out at the time of diagnosis, as well as three, four, six, and 12 weeks after the diagnosis. The effect of vertebroplasty, compared with conservative treatment, on back pain (visual analogue score, VAS) was analysed with the use of analysis-of-covariance models that adjusted for pre-operative VAS scores.

RESULTS

A total of 342 patients finished the 12-week follow-up, and 120 patients underwent vertebroplasty (35.1%). The effect of vertebroplasty over conservative treatment was significant regardless of age, body mass index, medical comorbidity, previous fracture, pain duration, bone mineral density, degree of vertebral body compression, and canal encroachment. However, the effect of vertebroplasty was not significant at all time points in patients with increased sagittal vertical axis.

CONCLUSIONS

For single-level acute osteoporotic vertebral compression fractures, the effect of vertebroplasty was less favourable in patients with increased sagittal vertical axis (> 5 cm) possible due to aggravation of kyphotic stress from walking imbalance.Cite this article: Y-C. Kim, D. H. Bok, H-G. Chang, S. W. Kim, M. S. Park, J. K. Oh, J. Kim, T-H. Kim. Increased sagittal vertical axis is associated with less effective control of acute pain following vertebroplasty. Bone Joint Res 2016;5:544-551. DOI: 10.1302/2046-3758.511.BJR-2016-0135.R1.

Outcomes and National Trends for the Surgical Treatment of Lumbar Spine Trauma

Introduction. Operative treatment of lumbar spine compression fractures includes fusion and/or cement augmentation. Our aim was to evaluate postoperative differences in patients treated surgically with fusion, vertebroplasty, or kyphoplasty. Methods. The Nationwide Inpatient Sample Database search for adult vertebral compression fracture patients treated 2004–2011 identified 102,316 surgical patients: 30.6% underwent spinal fusion, 17.1% underwent kyphoplasty, and 49.9% underwent vertebroplasty. Univariate analysis of patient and hospital characteristics, by treatment, was performed. Multivariable analysis was used to determine factors associated with mortality, nonroutine discharge, complications, and patient safety. Results. Average patient age: fusion (46.2), kyphoplasty (78.5), vertebroplasty (76.7) (p < .0001). Gender, race, household income, hospital-specific characteristics, and insurance differences were found (p ≤ .001). Leading comorbidities were hypertension, osteoporosis, and diabetes. Risks for higher mortality (OR 2.0: CI: 1.6–2.5), nonroutine discharge (OR 1.6, CI: 1.6–1.7), complications (OR 1.1, CI: 1.0–1.1), and safety related events (OR 1.1, CI: 1.0–1.1) rose consistently with increasing age, particularly among fusion patients. Preexisting comorbidities and longer in-hospital length of stay were associated with increased odds of nonroutine discharge, complications, and patient safety. Conclusions. Fusion patients had higher rates of poorer outcomes compared to vertebroplasty and kyphoplasty cohorts. Mortality, nonroutine discharge, complications, and adverse events increased consistently with older age.

Perioperative morbidity and mortality after lumbar trauma in the elderly

OBJECT Traumatic fractures of the thoracolumbar spine are common injuries, accounting for approximately 90% of all spinal trauma. Lumbar spine trauma in the elderly is a growing public health problem with relatively little evidence to guide clinical management. The authors sought to characterize the complications, morbidity, and mortality associated with surgical and nonsurgical management in elderly patients with traumatic fractures of the lumbar spine. METHODS Using the National Sample Program of the National Trauma Data Bank, the authors performed a retrospective analysis of patients ≥ 55 years of age who had traumatic fracture to the lumbar spine. This group was divided into middle-aged (55-69 years) and elderly (≥ 70 years) cohorts. Cohorts were subdivided into nonoperative, vertebroplasty or kyphoplasty, noninstrumented surgery, and instrumented surgery. Univariate and multivariable analyses were used to characterize and identify predictors of medical and surgical complications, mortality, hospital length of stay, ICU length of stay, number of days on ventilator, and hospital discharge in each subgroup. Adjusted odds ratios, mean differences, and associated 95% CIs were reported. Statistical significance was assessed at p < 0.05, and the Bonferroni correction for multiple comparisons was applied for each outcome analysis. RESULTS Between 2003 and 2012, 22,835 people met the inclusion criteria, which represents 94,103 incidents nationally. Analyses revealed a similar medical and surgical complication profile between age groups. The most prevalent medical complications were pneumonia (7.0%), acute respiratory distress syndrome (3.6%), and deep venous thrombosis (3%). Surgical site infections occurred in 6.3% of cases. Instrumented surgery was associated with the highest odds of each complication (p < 0.001). The inpatient mortality rate was 6.8% for all subjects. Multivariable analyses demonstrated that age ≥ 70 years was an independent predictor of mortality (OR 3.16, 95% CI 2.77-3.60), whereas instrumented surgery (multivariable OR 0.38, 95% CI 0.28-0.52) and vertebroplasty or kyphoplasty (OR 0.27, 95% CI 0.17-0.45) were associated with decreased odds of death. In surviving patients, both older age (OR 0.32, 95% CI 0.30-0.34) and instrumented fusion (OR 0.37, 95% CI 0.33-0.41) were associated with decreased odds of discharge to home. CONCLUSIONS The present study confirms that lumbar surgery in the elderly is associated with increased morbidity. In particular, instrumented fusion is associated with periprocedural complications, prolonged hospitalization, and a decreased likelihood of being discharged home. However, fusion surgery is also associated with reduced mortality. Age alone should not be an exclusionary factor in identifying surgical candidates for instrumented lumbar spinal fusion. Future studies are needed to confirm these findings.

Safety and clinical performance of kyphoplasty and SpineJack(®) procedures in the treatment of osteoporotic vertebral compression fractures: a pilot, monocentric, investigator-initiated study

Clinical performance and safety of two percutaneous vertebral cement augmentation (VA) procedures (SpineJack® and Kyphx Xpander® balloon) were compared in patients with osteoporotic compression fractures. Both techniques were safe, efficient, and led to a rapid and marked improvement in clinical signs; nevertheless, SpineJack showed better restoration of vertebral heights and angles, maintained over time.

INTRODUCTION

In patients with osteoporotic vertebral compression fractures (VCFs), both SpineJack® (SJ) and balloon kyphoplasty (BKP) led to a rapid and marked improvement in clinical signs. This pilot, monocentric, investigator-initiated, prospective study aimed to compare two percutaneous vertebral augmentation procedures in the painful osteoporotic VCF treatment.

METHODS

Thirty patients were randomized to receive SJ (n = 15) or BKP (n = 15). Analgesic consumption, back pain intensity (visual analog scale (VAS)), and Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) scores were recorded preoperatively, at 5 days and 1, 3, 6, and 12 months post-surgery. Quality of life (EQ-VAS score) was evaluated at 1, 3, 6, and 12 months. Spine X-rays were taken 48 h prior to procedure and 5 days and 6 and 12 months after.

RESULTS

SpineJack® led to a significantly shorter intervention period (23 vs 32 min; p < 0.001), a strong, rapid, and long-lasting decline in pain (94 vs 82 % at 12 months) and in functional disability (94 vs 90 % at 12 months), a greater and sustainable mean correction of anterior (12 ± 13 vs 0 ± 7 % for BKP, p = 0.003) and central height (12 ± 10 vs 2 ± 6 % for BKP, p = 0.001) at 12 months, and a larger restoration of the vertebral body angle still evident 12 months after implantation (-4.4° ± 5.8° vs 0.2° ± 3.0° for BKP; p = 0.012).

CONCLUSIONS

This pilot study showed that both techniques were safe and efficient for the osteoporotic VCF treatment. Radiological results indicate that the SpineJack® procedure has a higher potential for vertebral body height restoration and maintenance over time.

Percutaneous pedicle screw placement into a spinal segment previously treated with vertebroplasty: technical note

Vertebral augmentation with cement has become a common procedure for the treatment of compression fractures, leading to a growing population who have had this procedure and are now in need of another spinal surgery. This technical note reports an undescribed method for placing pedicle screws through a previously cemented level.

CONTROVERSIES ON VERTEBROPLASTY AND KYPHOPLASTY FOR VERTEBRAL COMPRESSION FRACTURES

Vertebroplasty and kyphoplasty are widely used for osteoporotic and cancer-related vertebral compression fractures refractory to medical treatment. Many aspects of these procedures have been extensively discussed in the literature during the last few years. In this article, we perform a critical appraisal of current evidence on effectiveness and ongoing controversies regarding surgical technique, indications and contraindications, clinical outcomes and potential complications of these procedures.

Morbidity and Mortality After Vertebral Fractures: Comparison of Vertebral Augmentation and Nonoperative Management in the Medicare Population

STUDY DESIGN

Vertebral compression fracture (VCF) patients in the 100% US Medicare data set (2005-2009).

OBJECTIVE

To compare the mortality and morbidity risks for VCF patients undergoing conservative treatment (nonoperated), balloon kyphoplasty (BKP), and vertebroplasty (VP).

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

Studies have reported lower mortality risk for BKP or VP cohorts than nonoperated cohorts, but it is uncertain whether there are any differences in morbidity risks.

METHODS

Survival and morbidity was estimated by the Kaplan-Meier method, and the differences in outcomes were assessed by Cox regression between BKP, VP, and nonoperated cohorts. A propensity matching analysis was used to account for potential bias.

RESULTS

A total of 1,038,956 VCF patients were identified, including 141,343 BKP patients and 75,364 VP patients. The nonoperated cohort was found to have a 55% higher adjusted risk of mortality (P < 0.001) than the BKP cohort and 25% higher adjusted risk of mortality (P < 0.001) than the VP cohort. The BKP cohort was also found to have a 19% lower adjusted risk of mortality (P < 0.001) than the VP cohort. The findings were similar for mortality with pneumonia diagnosed in the 90 days before death and also after propensity matching, as well as for subgroups of osteoporotic VCF patients, including those who survived at least 1 year and those with no cancer diagnosis. With propensity matching, the nonoperated cohort had significantly higher adjusted risks of pneumonia, myocardial infarction/cardiac complications, DVT, and urinary tract infection than the BKP cohort but lower adjusted risks of subsequent augmentation/fusion, subsequent augmentation, and pulmonary/respiratory complications. The BKP cohort also had significantly lower risks of morbidity than the VP cohort, except for deep venous thrombosis (DVT), infection, and myocardial infarction/cardiac complications, which were similar between both cohorts.

CONCLUSION

VCF patients in the Medicare population who received vertebral augmentation therapies, specifically BKP and VP, experienced lower mortality and overall morbidity than VCF patients who received conservative management.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

3.

Randomized controlled trial of vertebroplasty versus kyphoplasty in the treatment of vertebral compression fractures

BACKGROUND

We present the results of a randomized controlled trial evaluating the efficacy of vertebroplasty versus kyphoplasty in treating vertebral body compression fractures.

METHODS

Patients with vertebral body compression fractures were randomly assigned to treatment with kyphoplasty or vertebroplasty. Primary endpoints were pain (0-10 scale) and disability assessed using the Roland-Morris Disability Questionnaire (RMDQ). Outcomes were assessed at 3 days, 1 month, 6 months, and 1 year following the procedure.

RESULTS

115 subjects were enrolled in the trial with 59 (51.3%) randomly assigned to kyphoplasty and 56 (48.7%) assigned to vertebroplasty. Mean (SD) pain scores at baseline, 3 days, 30 days, and 1 year for kyphoplasty versus vertebroplasty were 7.4 (1.9) vs 7.9 (2.0), 4.1 (2.8) vs 3.7 (3.0), 3.4 (2.5) vs 3.6 (2.9), and 3.0 (2.8) vs 2.3 (2.6), respectively (p>0.05 at all time points). Mean (SD) RMDQ scores at baseline, 3 days, 30 days, 180 days, and 1 year were 17.3 (6.6) vs 16.3 (7.4), 11.8 (7.9) vs 10.9 (8.2), 8.6 (7.2) vs 8.8 (8.5), 7.9 (7.4) vs 7.3 (7.7), 7.5 (7.2) vs 6.7 (8.0), respectively (p>0.05 at all time points). For baseline to 12-month assessment in average pain and RMDQ scores, the standardized effect size between kyphoplasty and vertebroplasty was small at -0.36 (95% CI -1.02 to 0.31) and -0.04 (95% CI -1.68 to 1.60), respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Our study indicates that vertebroplasty and kyphoplasty appear to be equally effective in substantially reducing pain and disability in patients with vertebral body compression fractures.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT00279877.

KAST Study: The Kiva System As a Vertebral Augmentation Treatment-A Safety and Effectiveness Trial: A Randomized, Noninferiority Trial Comparing the Kiva System With Balloon Kyphoplasty in Treatment of Osteoporotic Vertebral Compression Fractures

STUDY DESIGN

The KAST (Kiva Safety and Effectiveness Trial) study was a pivotal, multicenter, randomized control trial for evaluation of safety and effectiveness in the treatment of patients with painful, osteoporotic vertebral compression fractures (VCFs).

OBJECTIVE

The objective was to demonstrate noninferiority of the Kiva system to balloon kyphoplasty (BK) with respect to the composite primary endpoint.

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

Annual incidence of osteoporotic VCFs is prevalent. Optimal treatment of VCFs should address pain, function, and deformity. Kiva is a novel implant for vertebral augmentation in the treatment of VCFs.

METHODS

A total of 300 subjects with 1 or 2 painful osteoporotic VCFs were randomized to blindly receive Kiva (n = 153) or BK (n = 147). Subjects were followed through 12 months. The primary endpoint was a composite at 12 months defined as a reduction in fracture pain by at least 15 mm on the visual analogue scale, maintenance or improvement in function on the Oswestry Disability Index, and absence of device-related serious adverse events. Secondary endpoints included cement usage, extravasation, and adjacent level fracture.

RESULTS

A mean improvement of 70.8 and 71.8 points in the visual analogue scale score and 38.1 and 42.2 points in the Oswestry Disability Index was noted in Kiva and BK, respectively. No device-related serious adverse events occurred. Despite significant differences in risk factors favoring the control group at baseline, the primary endpoint demonstrated noninferiority of Kiva to BK. Analysis of secondary endpoints revealed superiority with respect to cement use and site-reported extravasation and a positive trend in adjacent level fracture warranting further study.

CONCLUSION

The KAST study successfully established that the Kiva system is noninferior to BK based on a composite primary endpoint assessment incorporating pain-, function-, and device-related serious adverse events for the treatment of VCFs due to osteoporosis. Kiva was shown to be noninferior to BK and revealed a positive trend in several secondary endpoints.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

1.

Percutaneous vertebroplasty for osteoporotic vertebral compression fracture

BACKGROUND

Percutaneous vertebroplasty is widely used to treat acute and subacute painful osteoporotic vertebral fractures although recent placebo-controlled trials have questioned its value.

OBJECTIVES

To synthesise the available evidence regarding the benefits and harms of vertebroplasty for treatment of osteoporotic vertebral fractures.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE and EMBASE up to November 2014. We also reviewed reference lists of review articles, trials and trial registries to identify any other potentially relevant trials.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised and quasi-randomised controlled trials (RCTs) including adults with painful osteoporotic vertebral fractures of any duration and comparing vertebroplasty with placebo (sham), usual care, or any other intervention. As it is least prone to bias, vertebroplasty compared with placebo was the primary comparison. Major outcomes were mean overall pain, disability, disease-specific and overall health-related quality of life, patient-reported treatment success, new symptomatic vertebral fractures and number of other serious adverse events.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

At least two review authors independently selected trials for inclusion, extracted data, performed 'Risk of bias' assessment and assessed the quality of the body of evidence for the main outcomes using GRADE.

MAIN RESULTS

Eleven RCTs and one quasi-RCT conducted in various countries were included. Two trials compared vertebroplasty with placebo (209 randomised participants), six compared vertebroplasty with usual care (566 randomised participants) and four compared vertebroplasty with kyphoplasty (545 randomised participants). Trial size varied from 34 to 404 participants, most participants were female, mean age ranged between 63.3 and 80 years, and mean symptom duration varied from a week to more than six months.Both placebo-controlled trials were judged to be at low overall risk of bias while other included trials were generally considered to be at high risk of bias across a range of criteria, most seriously due to lack of participant and study personnel blinding.Compared with placebo, there was moderate quality evidence based upon two trials that vertebroplasty provides no demonstrable benefits with respect to pain, disability, disease-specific or overall quality of life or treatment success. At one month, mean pain (on a scale 0 to 10, higher scores indicate more pain) was 5 points with placebo and 0.7 points better (1.5 better to 0.15 worse) with vertebroplasty, an absolute pain reduction of 7% (15% better to 1.5% worse) and relative reduction of 10% (21% better to 2% worse) (two trials, 201 participants). At one month, mean disability measured by the Roland Morris Disability Questionnaire (scale range 0 to 23, higher scores indicate worse disability) was 13.6 points in the placebo group and 1.1 points better (2.9 better to 0.8 worse) in the vertebroplasty group, absolute improvement in disability 4.8% (12.8% better to 3.3% worse), relative change 6.3% better (17.0% better to 4.4% worse) (two trials, 201 participants).At one month, disease-specific quality of life measured by the QUALEFFO (scale 0 to 100, higher scores indicating worse quality of life) was 2.4 points in the placebo group and 0.40 points worse (4.58 better to 5.38 worse) in the vertebroplasty group, absolute change: 0.4% worse (5% worse to 5% better), relative change 0.7% worse (9% worse to 8% better (based upon one trial, 73 participants). At one month overall quality of life measured by the EQ5D (0 = death to 1 = perfect health, higher scores indicate greater quality of life at one month was 0.27 points in the placebo group and 0.05 points better (0.01 worse to 0.11 better) in the vertebroplasty group, absolute improvement in quality of life 5% (1% worse to 11% better), relative change 18% better (4% worse to 39% better) (two trials, 201 participants). Based upon one trial (78 participants) at one month, 9/40 (or 225 per 1000) people perceived that treatment was successful in the placebo group compared with 12/38 (or 315 per 1000; range 150 to 664) in the vertebroplasty group, RR 1.40 (95% CI 0.67 to 2.95), absolute risk difference 9% more reported success (11% fewer to 29% more); relative change 40% more reported success (33% fewer to 195% more).Based upon moderate quality evidence from three trials (one placebo, two usual care, 281 participants) with up to 12 months follow-up, we are uncertain whether or not vertebroplasty increases the risk of new symptomatic vertebral fractures (28/143 observed in the vertebroplasty group compared with 19/138 in the control group; RR 1.47 (95% CI 0.39 to 5.50).Similary, based upon moderate quality evidence from two placebo-controlled trials (209 participants), we are uncertain about the exact risk of other adverse events (3/106 were observed in the vertebroplasty group compared with 3/103 in the placebo group; RR 1.01 (95% CI 0.21 to 4.85)). Notably, serious adverse events reported with vertebroplasty included osteomyelitis, cord compression, thecal sac injury and respiratory failure.Our subgroup analyses provided limited evidence that the effects did not differ according to duration of pain ≤ 6 weeks versus > 6 weeks. Including data from the six trials that compared vertebroplasty with usual care in a sensitivity analyses inconsistently altered the primary results, with all combined analyses displaying substantial to considerable heterogeneity.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Based upon moderate quality evidence, our review does not support a role for vertebroplasty for treating osteoporotic vertebral fractures in routine practice. We found no demonstrable clinically important benefits compared with a sham procedure and subgroup analyses indicated that results did not differ according to duration of pain ≤ 6 weeks versus > 6 weeks. Sensitivity analyses confirmed that open trials comparing vertebroplasty with usual care are likely to have overestimated any benefit of vertebroplasty. Correcting for these biases would likely drive any benefits observed with vertebroplasty towards the null, in keeping with findings from the placebo-controlled trials.Numerous serious adverse events have been observed following vertebroplasty. However due to the small number of events, we cannot be certain about whether or not vertebroplasty results in a clinically important increased risk of new symptomatic vertebral fractures and/or other serious adverse events. Patients should be informed about both the lack of high quality evidence supporting benefit of vertebroplasty and its potential for harm.

Health economic aspects of vertebral augmentation procedures

We reviewed all peer-reviewed papers analysing the cost-effectiveness of vertebroplasty and balloon kyphoplasty for osteoporotic vertebral compression fractures. In general, the procedures appear to be cost effective but are very dependent upon model input details. Better data, rather than new models, are needed to answer outstanding questions. Vertebral augmentation procedures (VAPs), including vertebroplasty (VP) and balloon kyphoplasty (BKP), seek to stabilise fractured vertebral bodies and reduce pain. The aim of this paper is to review current literature on the cost-effectiveness of VAPs as well as to discuss the challenges for economic evaluation in this research area. A systematic literature search was conducted to identify existing published studies on the cost-effectiveness of VAPs in patients with osteoporosis. Only peer-reviewed published articles that fulfilled the criteria of being regarded as full economic evaluations including both morbidity and mortality in the outcome measure in the form of quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) were included. The search identified 949 studies, of which four (0.4 %) were identified as relevant with one study added later. The reviewed studies differed widely in terms of study design, modelling framework and data used, yielding different results and conclusions regarding the cost-effectiveness of VAPs. Three out of five studies indicated in the base case results that VAPs were cost effective compared to non-surgical management (NSM). The five main factors that drove the variations in the cost-effectiveness between the studies were time horizon, quality of life effect of treatment, offset time of the treatment effect, reduced number of bed days associated with VAPs and mortality benefit with treatment. The cost-effectiveness of VAPs is uncertain. In answering the remaining questions, new cost-effectiveness analysis will yield limited benefit. Rather, studies that can reduce the uncertainty in the underlying data, especially regarding the long-term clinical outcomes of VAPs, should be conducted.

Bracing for thoracolumbar fractures

Traumatic fractures of the thoracolumbar spine are relatively common occurrences that can be a source of pain and disability. Similarly, osteoporotic vertebral fractures are also frequent events and represent a significant health issue specific to the elderly. Neurologically intact patients with traumatic thoracolumbar fractures can commonly be treated nonoperatively with bracing. Nonoperative treatment is not suitable for patients with neurological deficits or highly unstable fractures. The role of operative versus nonoperative treatment of burst fractures is controversial, with high-quality evidence supporting both options. Osteoporotic vertebral fractures can be managed with bracing or vertebral augmentation in most cases. There is, however, a lack of high-quality evidence comparing operative versus nonoperative fractures in this population. Bracing is a low-risk, cost-effective method to treat certain thoracolumbar fractures and offers efficacy equivalent to that of surgical management in many cases. The evidence for bracing of osteoporotic-type fractures is less clear, and further investigation will be necessary to delineate its optimal role.

Cement augmentation in vertebral burst fractures

As a result of axial compression, traumatic vertebral burst fractures disrupt the anterior column, leading to segmental instability and cord compression. In situations with diminished anterior column support, pedicle screw fixation alone may lead to delayed kyphosis, nonunion, and hardware failure. Vertebroplasty and kyphoplasty (balloon-assisted vertebroplasty) have been used in an effort to provide anterior column support in traumatic burst fractures. Cited advantages are providing immediate stability, improving pain, and reducing hardware malfunction. When used in isolation or in combination with posterior instrumentation, these techniques theoretically allow for improved fracture reduction and maintenance of spinal alignment while avoiding the complications and morbidity of anterior approaches. Complications associated with cement use (leakage, systemic effects) are similar to those seen in the treatment of osteoporotic compression fractures; however, extreme caution must be used in fractures with a disrupted posterior wall.

Reducing radiation exposure during kyphoplasty with the use of a remote control injection system: a prospective study

STUDY DESIGN

A prospective study.

OBJECTIVE

To compare surgeons' radiation exposure during kyphoplasty with and without the use of a remote control injection system.

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

Distance from radiation sources is a critical factor for reducing radiation exposure during spine surgery. A newly designed device was used to minimize operators' radiation exposure during kyphoplasty.

METHODS

Forty-four patients admitted for single-level osteoporotic vertebral compression fracture were randomly divided into 2 groups (groups A and B) and treated with kyphoplasty. The remote control injection system was used only in group B. The radiation doses to the surgeon's eyes, thyroid, chest, and right wrist were recorded with 4 unprotected radiometers simultaneously. Operation time, fluoroscopic time, cement amount, patient-reported pre- and postoperative visual analogue scale scores for pain, and complications were recorded.

RESULTS

For group A, the radiation doses at the eyes, thyroid, and right wrist were 1.132 ± 0.104 mSv, 0.647 ± 0.049 mSv, 0.578 ± 0.056 mSv, and 1.877 ± 0.214 mSv, respectively; for Group B, these doses were 0.257 ± 0.067 mSv, 0.201 ± 0.049 mSv, 0.145 ± 0.033 mSv, and 0.353 ± 0.046 mSv, respectively (P < 0.05). Comparisons of the radiation doses the chief surgeon and the resident surgeon received showed that the resident surgeon received more radiation during group A procedures; during group B procedures, the surgeons received similar doses. The proportion of average fluoroscopic time devoted to the bone cement injection step for groups A and B was 64% and 63%, respectively, and the average proportion of the radiation doses that were received during the bone cement injection step was 66% for group A and 36% for group B. Compared with the preoperative visual analogue scale score, the postoperative visual analogue scale score was significantly reduced in both groups.

CONCLUSION

During kyphoplasty, the use of the remote control injection system can significantly reduce surgeons' radiation exposure without affecting the efficiency of procedures.

Racial and health insurance disparities of inpatient spine augmentation for osteoporotic vertebral fractures from 2005 to 2010

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

Vertebroplasty and kyphoplasty are frequently utilized in the treatment of symptomatic vertebral body fractures. While prior studies have demonstrated disparities in the treatment of back pain and care for osteoporotic patients, disparities in spine augmentation have not been investigated. We investigated racial and health insurance status differences in the use of spine augmentation for the treatment of osteoporotic vertebral fractures in the United States.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Using the Nationwide Inpatient Sample from 2005 to 2010, we selected all discharges with a primary diagnosis of vertebral fracture (International Classification of Diseases-9 code 733.13). Patients who received spine augmentation were identified by using International Classification of Diseases-9 procedure code 81.65 for vertebroplasty and 81.66 for kyphoplasty. Patients with a diagnosis of cancer were excluded. We compared usage rates of spine augmentation by race/ethnicity (white, black, Hispanic, and Asian/Pacific Islander) and insurance status (Medicare, Medicaid, self-pay, and private). Comparisons among groups were made by using χ(2) tests. A multivariate logistic regression analysis was fit to determine variables associated with spine augmentation use.

RESULTS

A total of 228,329 patients were included in this analysis, of whom 129,206 (56.6%) received spine augmentation. Among patients with spine augmentation, 97,022 (75%) received kyphoplasty and 32,184 (25%) received vertebroplasty; 57.5% (92,779/161,281) of white patients received spine augmentation compared with 38.7% (1405/3631) of black patients (P < .001). Hispanic patients had significantly lower spine augmentation rates compared with white patients (52.3%, 3777/7222, P < .001) as did Asian/Pacific Islander patients (53.1%, 1784/3361, P < .001). The spine augmentation usage rate was 57.2% (114,768/200,662) among patients with Medicare, significantly higher than that of those with Medicaid (43.9%, 1907/4341, P < .001) and those who self-pay (40.2%, 488/1214, P < .001).

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings demonstrate substantial racial and health insurance-based disparities in the inpatient use of spinal augmentation for the treatment of osteoporotic vertebral fracture.

Morbidity, mortality, and readmission after vertebral augmentation: analysis of 850 patients from the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program database

STUDY DESIGN

Retrospective cohort study.

OBJECTIVE

To identify risk factors for poor short-term outcomes after vertebral augmentation procedures.

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

Vertebral compression fractures are the most common fractures of osteoporosis and are frequently treated with vertebroplasty or kyphoplasty. There is a shortage of information about risk factors for short-term, general health outcomes after vertebral augmentation in the literature.

METHODS

Patients older than 65 years who underwent vertebroplasty or kyphoplasty in 2011 and 2012 were identified from the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program database. Patient characteristics were tested for association with 30-day adverse events, mortality, and readmission using bivariate and multivariate analyses.

RESULTS

A total of 850 patients met inclusion criteria. The average age was 78.9±11.7 years (mean±standard deviation) and females made up 70.8% of the cohort. Of these patients, 9.5% had any adverse event (AAE), and 6.6% had a serious adverse event (SAE). Death occurred in 1.5% of patients, and 10.8% were readmitted within the first 30 postoperative days.On multivariate analysis, AAE and SAE were both significantly associated with American Society of Anesthesiologists class 4 (AAE: odds ratio [OR]=2.7, P=0.013; SAE: OR=2.5, P=0.040) and inpatient status before procedure (AAE: OR=2.7, P<0.001, SAE: OR=2.4, P=0.003). Increased postoperative mortality rate was associated with American Society of Anesthesiologists class 4 (OR=6.4, P=0.024) and the use of nongeneral anesthesia (OR=4.0, P=0.022). Readmission was associated with history of pulmonary disease (OR=2.0, P=0.005) and inpatient status before procedure (OR=1.9, P=0.005).

CONCLUSION

Adverse general health outcomes were relatively common, and the factors identified in the earlier text associated with patient outcomes after vertebral augmentation may be useful for preoperative discussions and counseling.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

3.

A randomized trial comparing balloon kyphoplasty and vertebroplasty for vertebral compression fractures due to osteoporosis

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

Several trials have compared vertebral augmentation with nonsurgical treatment for vertebral compression fractures. This trial compares the efficacy and safety of balloon kyphoplasty and vertebroplasty.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Patients with osteoporosis with 1-3 acute fractures (T5-L5) were randomized and treated with kyphoplasty (n = 191) or vertebroplasty (n = 190) and were not blinded to the treatment assignment. Twelve- and 24-month subsequent radiographic fracture incidence was the primary end point. Due to low enrollment and early withdrawals, the study was terminated with 404/1234 (32.7%) patients enrolled.

RESULTS

The average age of patients was 75.6 years (77.4% female). Mean procedure duration was longer for kyphoplasty (40.0 versus 31.8 minutes, P < .001). At 12 months, 7.8% fewer patients with kyphoplasty (50/140 versus 57/131) had subsequent radiographic fracture, and there were 8.6% fewer at 24 months (54/110 versus 64/111). The results were not statistically significant (P > .21). When we used time to event for new clinical fractures, kyphoplasty approached statistical significance in longer fracture-free survival (Wilcoxon, P = .0596). Similar pain and function improvements were observed. CT demonstrated lower cement extravasation for kyphoplasty (157/214 versus 164/201 levels treated, P = .047). For kyphoplasty versus vertebroplasty, common adverse events within 30 postoperative days were procedural pain (12/191, 9/190), back pain (14/191, 28/190), and new vertebral fractures (9/191, 17/190); similar 2-year occurrence of device-related cement embolism (1/191, 1/190), procedural pain (3/191, 3/190), back pain (2/191, 3/190), and new vertebral fracture (2/191, 2/190) was observed.

CONCLUSIONS

Kyphoplasty and vertebroplasty had similar long-term improvement in pain and disability with similar safety profiles and few device-related complications. Procedure duration was shorter with vertebroplasty. Kyphoplasty had fewer cement leakages and a trend toward longer fracture-free survival.

Controversial issues in kyphoplasty and vertebroplasty in osteoporotic vertebral fractures

Kyphoplasty (KP) and vertebroplasty (VP) have been successfully employed for many years for the treatment of osteoporotic vertebral fractures. The purpose of this review is to resolve the controversial issues raised by the two randomized trials that claimed no difference between VP and SHAM procedure. In particular we compare nonsurgical management (NSM) and KP and VP, in terms of clinical parameters (pain, disability, quality of life, and new fractures), cost-effectiveness, radiological variables (kyphosis correction and vertebral height restoration), and VP versus KP for cement extravasation and complications profile. Cement types and optimal filling are analyzed and technological innovations are presented. Finally unipedicular/bipedicular techniques are compared. Conclusion. VP and KP are superior to NSM in clinical and radiological parameters and probably more cost-effective. KP is superior to VP in sagittal balance improvement and cement leaking. Complications are rare but serious adverse events have been described, so caution should be exerted. Unilateral procedures should be pursued whenever feasible. Upcoming randomized trials (CEEP, OSTEO-6, STIC-2, and VERTOS IV) will provide the missing link.