Vertebral Augmentation: Is It Time to Get Past the Pain? A Consensus Statement from the Sardinia Spine and Stroke Congress

An Algorithmic Overview of Advanced Pain Therapies: A Narrative Review

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Quickly referenceable, streamlined, algorithmic approaches for advanced pain management are lacking for patients, trainees, non-pain specialists, and interventional specialists. This manuscript aims to address this gap by proposing a comprehensive, evidence-based algorithm for managing neuropathic, nociceptive, and cancer-associated pain. Such an algorithm is crucial for pain medicine education, offering a structured approach for patient care refractory to conservative management.

RECENT FINDINGS

A comprehensive literary review with PubMed and regulatory documents from the United States Food and Drug Administration were searched for a variety of interventions. Pain syndromes were categorized into nociceptive and neuropathic pain, and an algorithm was constructed. Serving as an educational tool for patients, trainees, and non-pain specialists, and as an accessible reference for pain specialists, this algorithm bridges knowledge gaps, promotes interdisciplinary collaboration, and streamlines the learning curve for new practitioners. The strength of this algorithm lies in integrating extensive clinical data, emphasizing the latest clinical evidence, and providing a structured decision-making pathway.

Vertebral Augmentation for Osteoporotic Vertebral Compression Fractures: What is the Current Evidence Pro and Con?

Osteoporotic vertebral compression fractures can be quite challenging to treat, especially since they often occur in older adults and can be associated with significant morbidity and mortality. The standard treatment for these fractures has been medical management, as many of these patients are not candidates for open surgery. Vertebral augmentation procedures have emerged as another treatment option. Though initially accepted by clinicians, the benefit of these procedures has been questioned by several clinical trials. Safety concerns related to adjacent level fractures and cement extravasation have also been raised. We review these controversies in the context of the current literature.

Combined vertebroplasty and pedicle screw insertion for vertebral consolidation: feasibility and technical considerations

PURPOSE

To assess the feasibility and technical accuracy of performing pedicular screw placement combined with vertebroplasty in the radiological setting.

METHODS

Patients who underwent combined vertebroplasty and pedicle screw insertion under combined computed tomography and fluoroscopic guidance in 4 interventional radiology centers from 2018 to 2023 were retrospectively assessed. Patient demographics, vertebral lesion type, and procedural data were analyzed. Strict intra-pedicular screw positioning was considered as technical success. Pain score was assessed according to the Visual Analogue Scale before the procedure and in the 1-month follow-up consultation.

RESULTS

Fifty-seven patients (38 men and 19 women) with a mean age of 72.8 (SD = 11.4) years underwent a vertebroplasty associated with pedicular screw insertion for the treatment of traumatic fractures (29 patients) and neoplastic disease (28 patients). Screw placement accuracy assessed by post-procedure CT scan was 95.7% (89/93 inserted screws). A total of 93 pedicle screw placements (36 bi-pedicular and 21 unipedicular) in 32 lumbar, 22 thoracic, and 3 cervical levels were analyzed. Mean reported procedure time was 48.8 (SD = 14.7) min and average injected cement volume was 4.4 (SD = 0.9) mL. A mean VAS score decrease of 5 points was observed at 1-month follow-up (7.7, SD = 1.3 versus 2.7, SD = 1.7), p < .001.

CONCLUSION

Combining a vertebroplasty and pedicle screw insertion is technically viable in the radiological setting, with a high screw positioning accuracy of 95.7%.