4.4 Article

Calcium phosphate cement-based vertebroplasty compared with conservative treatment for osteoporotic compression fractures: a matched case-control study

期刊

JOURNAL OF NEUROSURGERY-SPINE
卷 4, 期 2, 页码 110-117

出版社

AMER ASSOC NEUROLOGICAL SURGEONS
DOI: 10.3171/spi.2006.4.2.110

关键词

vertebroplasty; osteoporosis; vertebral compression fracture; biodegradable bone cement substitute; calcium phosphate cement

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Object. Few studies have been conducted to compare vertebroplasty and conservative treatment for osteoporotic vertebral compression fractures (OVCFs). To investigate the effects of calcium phosphate cement (CPC)-based vertebroplasty on relief of pain and augmentation of the fractured vertebral body (VB), the authors compared the results of CPC-assisted vertebroplasty with those of conservative treatment alone. Methods. Two groups of patients were examined: the vertebroplasty group (30 consecutive patients with primary OVCF) and the control group (30 patients matched for age, sex, interval from injury to treatment, and grade of the posterior wall defects of the fractured VB). Outcome measures included the visual analog scale (VAS) score of back pain and analgesic requirements, and the radiographically documented rate of the VB kyphosis. The follow-up duration was more than 12 months (mean 17 months). The mean VAS score at 12 months after injury was 0.67 cm in the vertebroplasty group and 1.97 cm in the control group, and the mean improvement rates in the VAS scores were 91.6 and 73.6%, respectively (p < 0.0001). The mean duration of analgesic requirement was 8.3 days in the vertebroplasty group and 62.2 days in the control group (p = 0.0005). The mean kyphosis rate at 12 months after injury was 72.9% in the vertebroplasty group and 58% in the control group, and the mean recovery rate of kyphosis was + 8.4 and -21%, respectively (p < 0.0001). Conclusions. The authors conclude that CPC-assisted vertebroplasty provides better clinical and radiological results than conservative treatment for primary OVCF.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.4
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据