Percutaneous kyphoplasty for the treatment of distal lumbosacral pain caused by osteoporotic thoracolumbar vertebral fracture

Thoracolumbar fascia injury in osteoporotic vertebral fracture: the important concomitant damage

BACKGROUND

Thoracolumbar fascia injury (FI) is rarely discussed in osteoporotic vertebral fracture (OVF) patients in previous literature and it is usually neglected and treated as an unmeaning phenomenon. We aimed to evaluate the characteristics of the thoracolumbar fascia injury and further discuss its clinical significance in the treatment of kyphoplasty for osteoporotic vertebral fracture (OVF) patients.

METHODS

Based on the presence or absence of FI, 223 OVF patients were divided into two groups. The demographics of patients with and without FI were compared. The visual analogue scale and Oswestry disability index scores were compared preoperatively and after PKP treatment between these groups.

RESULTS

Thoracolumbar fascia injuries were observed in 27.8% of patients. Most FI showed a multi-level distribution pattern which involved a mean of 3.3 levels. Location of fractures, severity of fractures and severity of trauma were significantly different between patients with and without FI. In further comparison, severity of trauma was significantly different between patients with severe and non-severe FI. In patients with FI, VAS and ODI scores of 3 days and 1 month after PKP treatment were significantly worse compared to those without FI. It showed the same trend in VAS and ODI scores in patients with severe FI when compared to those patients with non-severe FI.

CONCLUSIONS

FI is not rare in OVF patients and presents multiple levels of involvement. The more serious trauma suffered, the more severe thoracolumbar fascia injury presented. The presence of FI which was related to residual acute back pain significantly affected the effectiveness of PKP in treating OVFs.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

retrospectively registered.

Pain location is associated with fracture type in acute osteoporotic thoracolumbar vertebral fracture: a prospective observation study

OBJECTIVE

This study investigated the relationship between pain location and fracture type in the patients with acute osteoporotic vertebral fracture (OVF).

DESIGN

A prospective observation study.

SUBJECT

A total of 306 patients with acute OVF were included.

METHODS

The site of pain of each patient was recorded, and the patients were divided into pain at fracture site group (group 1) and pain at non-fracture site group (group 2). The fracture type was classified into four types: type I, upper endplate type; type II, central type; type III, lower endplate type; type IV, burst type.

RESULTS

There were 146 patients in the group 1, of which 20.55% (30/146) were type I, 33.56% (49/146) were type II, 15.75% (23/146) were type III, and 30.14% (44/146) were type IV. There were 227 patients in the group 2, of which 57.27% (130/227) were type I, 5.29% (12/227) were type II, 35.24% (80/227) were type III, and 2.20% (5/227) were type IV. There was a statistical difference in the fracture type distribution between the two groups (P < 0.05). The VAS in the group 1 was higher than that in the group 2 at the initial diagnosis (P < 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

For patients with acute OVF, the site of pain is related to the type of fracture. The pain at the fracture site is more often observed in the central type and burst type of fractures, while pain at the non-fracture site is more often observed in the upper and lower endplate type of fractures. Additionally, when OVF are suspected, radiological assessment of thoracic and lumbar spine is recommended to better detect fractures that could cause pain distal to the site of the fracture.

Risk factors related to perioperative systemic complications and mortality in elderly patients with osteoporotic vertebral fractures-analysis of a large national inpatient database

BACKGROUND

The surgical treatment of osteoporotic vertebral fractures (OVF) is generally associated with a high risk of complications due to an aging population with osteoporosis; however, the detailed risk factors for systemic complications and mortality have not been clarified. We evaluated the risk factors for systemic complications and mortality in surgically treated OVF patients using a large national inpatient database.

METHODS

Patients over 65 years old who were diagnosed with OVF and received either anterior fusion (AF) or posterior fusion (PF), from 2012 to 2016, were extracted from the diagnosis procedure combination (DPC) database. In each of the perioperative systemic complications (+) or (-) group, and the in-hospital death (+) or (-) group, we surveyed the various risk factors related to perioperative systemic complications and in-hospital death.

RESULTS

The significant factors associated with systemic complications were older age (OR 1.38, 95% CI 1.09-1.74), a lower activity of daily living score upon admission (OR 1.52, 95%CI 1.19-1.94), atrial fibrillation (OR 2.14, 95%CI 1.25-3.65), renal failure (OR 2.29, 95%CI 1.25-4.20), and surgical procedure (AF, OR 1.73, 95%CI 1.35-2.22). The significant explanatory variables for in-hospital death were revealed to be male sex (OR 3.26, 95%CI 1.20-8.87), a lower body mass index (OR 3.97, 95%CI 1.23-12.86), unscheduled admission (OR 3.52, 95%CI 1.17-10.63), atrial fibrillation (OR 8.31, 95%CI 2.25-30.70), renal failure (OR 7.15, 95%CI 1.32-38.77), and schizophrenia (OR 8.23, 95%CI 1.66-42.02).

CONCLUSIONS

Atrial fibrillation and renal failure as preoperative comorbidities were common factors between perioperative systemic complications and mortality in elderly patients for OVF.

Back pain from painful osteoporotic vertebral fractures: discrepancy between the actual fracture location and the location suggested by patient-reported pain or physical examination findings

Caution is necessary when using symptom or physical examination findings to localize the osteoporotic vertebral fractures (VFs) attributable to the discrepant colocalized relationship.

INTRODUCTION

Whether the location of symptoms or physical examination findings delineates the appropriate spinal range for imaging has not been thoroughly investigated for VFs. The present study aims to analyze the consistency between the fractural vertebrae location and the location suggested by patient-reported pain or physical examination findings.

METHODS

This observational study, following a prospective design, enrolled 358 patients with VFs. The locations of two symptoms (patient-reported back pain [P-RBP], radiating pain [RP]) and findings from two physical examinations (spinal palpation tenderness [SPT], axial spinal percussion pain [ASPP]) were used to locate the VF segments identified using whole-spine magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). The percentage of agreements and kappa coefficient were calculated.

RESULTS

In 20.7% (74/358), the P-RBP site and VF segments were in the same location (kappa = 0.153); 21.2% (76/358) presented with concomitant RP in 93.4% (71/76) of whom the RP dermatome was colocalized with the VF segments (kappa = 0.924); 55.0% (197/358) and 23.2% (83/358) of patients presented with positive SPT and ASPP, respectively; and in 49.2% (97/197) and 96.4% (80/83) of patients with positive SPT (kappa = 0.435) and ASPP (kappa = 0.963), the positive finding and the VF segments were consistently colocalized.

CONCLUSIONS

The positive finding of RP or ASPP is useful in determining the spinal range for imaging tests, while an MRI scan covering the whole thoracic and lumbar spine is necessary in VF-suspected patients with P-RBP or positive SPT, indicating that caution is necessary when using symptoms or physical examination findings to localize VFs.