ACE Report Cover
Kyphoplasty superior to vertebroplasty for osteoporotic vertebral compression fractures
Translate this  ACE Report Translate this  ACE Report Translate this  ACE Report
Lingua
Download Download Download
Scaricare
Cite this Report Cite this Report Cite this Report
Citare
Add to Favorites Add to Favorites Add to Favorites Remove from Favorites Remove from Favorites Remove from Favorites
+ Preferiti
Translate this  ACE Report Translate this  ACE Report Translate this  ACE Report
Lingua
Download Download Download
Scaricare
Cite this Report Cite this Report Cite this Report
Citare
Add to Favorites Add to Favorites Add to Favorites Remove from Favorites Remove from Favorites Remove from Favorites
+ Preferiti
SPINE
Kyphoplasty superior to vertebroplasty for osteoporotic vertebral compression fractures .

OrthoEvidence Journal (OE Journal) - ACE Report

OE Journal. 2013;1(13):23 J Clin Neurosci. 2013 Jun;20(6):795-803. doi: 10.1016/j.jocn.2012.05.038. Epub 2013 Feb 18.
Autori che hanno contribuito

D Xing JX Ma XL Ma J Wang WG Xu Y Chen DH Song

10 trials (783 patients) were analyzed in this meta-analysis to compare the safety and efficacy between balloon kyphoplasty (KP) and percutaneous vertebroplasty (VP) in the treatment of osteoporotic vertebral compression fractures (OVCF). The meta-analysis found that balloon kyphoplasty had significantly better long term results (longer than 6 months) in terms of kyphosis angle, anterior height of the vertebral body, and cement leakage rates. No between-group differences were found in short and long term visual analog scale (VAS) pain and Oswestry-Disability Index scores, operative times, short term kyphosis angle, or adjacent-level fracture rates.


Dettagli sul finanziamento della pubblicazione +
Finanziamento:
Non-funded
Conflicts:
None disclosed

Rischio di pregiudizio

10/10

Criteri di segnalazione

18/20

Indice di fragilità

N/A

Were the search methods used to find evidence (original research) on the primary question or questions stated?

Was the search for evidence reasonably comprehensive?

Were the criteria used for deciding which studies to include in the overview reported?

Was the bias in the selection of studies avoided?

Were the criteria used for assessing the validity of the included studies reported?

Was the validity of all of the studies referred to in the text assessed with use of appropriate criteria (either in selecting the studies for inclusion or in analyzing the studies that were cited)?

Were the methods used to combine the findings of the relevant studies (to reach a conclusion) reported?

Were the findings of the relevant studies combined appropriately relative to the primary question that the overview addresses?

Were the conclusions made by the author or authors supported by the data and or analysis reported in the overview?

How would you rate the scientific quality of this evidence?

Sì = 1

Incerto = 0,5

Non rilevante = 0

No = 0

La valutazione dei criteri di segnalazione valuta la trasparenza con cui gli autori riportano le caratteristiche metodologiche e sperimentali dello studio all'interno della pubblicazione. La valutazione è suddivisa in cinque categorie che vengono presentate di seguito.

4/4

Introduction

4/4

Accessing Data

4/4

Analysing Data

3/4

Results

3/4

Discussion

Detsky AS, Naylor CD, O'Rourke K, McGeer AJ, L'Abbé KA. J Clin Epidemiol. 1992;45:255-65

L'Indice di Fragilità è uno strumento che aiuta l'interpretazione dei risultati significativi, fornendo una misura della forza di un risultato. L'Indice di Fragilità rappresenta il numero di eventi consecutivi che devono essere aggiunti a un risultato dicotomico per rendere il risultato non più significativo. Un numero piccolo rappresenta un risultato più debole, mentre un numero grande rappresenta un risultato più forte.

Perché questo studio era necessario ora?

Worldwide, osteoporotic vertebral compression fractures (OVCF) have detrimental effects on patients. They are responsible for decrease in anterior vertebral height, spinal deformity, reduced pulmonary function, abdominal and thoracic content restriction, impaired mobility, and depression. Two surgical procedures, vertebroplasty (VP) and kyphoplasty (KP), have demonstrated better pain relief, vertebral restoration, and mobility than conservative treatments. A previous study stated that kyphoplasty, however, had higher costs than vertebroplasty. Hence, a meta-analysis was needed to compare both surgical procedures with each other.

Qual era la domanda di ricerca principale?

What is the safety and efficacy of balloon kyphoplasty (KP) compared to percutaneous vertebroplasty (VP) in treatment of osteoporotic vertebral compression fractures (OVCF)?

Caratteristiche dello studio +
Data Source:
The primary search for peer-reviewed RCTs, published until end of May 2012, was conducted using PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) on MEDLINE, Embase, ScienceDirect, Ovid, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) databases. The secondary search was conducted on the Wold Health Organization’s International Clinical Trials Registry Platform, the UK National Research Register Archive and Current Controlled Trials for unpublished articles until March 1, 2012.
Index Terms:
The index terms used were: kyphoplasty, vertebral compression fracture, osteoporosis, and vertebroplasty.
Study Selection:
Two independent reviewers selected 10 RCTs (783 patients), comparing kyphoplasty to vertebroplasty, in treatment of osteoporotic vertebral compression fractures. The studies had to have at least one of the outcomes: operation time, subjective pain perception, quality of life evaluation, adjacent vertebral fracture incidence, bone cement leakage, vertebral body height, and kyphosis angle post-operation. Studies reporting non-osteoporotic vertebral fractures, previous surgeries performed, and degenerative spinal diseases were excluded. All disagreements were addressed until a consensus was reached. Both authors also conducted a “Risk of Bias” assessment using Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions guidelines, with a review by a third author.
Data Extraction:
Two independent reviewers extracted the study characteristics, types of interventions, numbers of vertebral bodies, surgical procedures, visual analog scale (VAS) scores, the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) scores, operation time, kyphosis angle, anterior vertebral body height, adjacent fractures and bone cement leakages. Short term results were considered as no more than 1 week, and long term results were longer than 6 months. A third reviewer rechecked the extracted data.
Data Synthesis:
Review Manager Software (RevMan Version 5.1) was used for all data analysis. Continuous outcomes were stated as mean differences (MD) with 95% confidence intervals (CI). Dichotomous outcomes were depicted as risk ratios (RR) with 95% CI. All p<0.05 were considered significant. Sensitivity and subgroup analysis was conducted, studying sources of heterogeneity, by chi-square and I-square tests.
Quali erano i risultati importanti?
  • In 7 trials, reporting short term VAS no difference was found between KP and VP (MD= -0.57, 95% CI= -1.33 to 0.20; p=0.15). Similar results were seen in long term VAS scores in 9 studies (MD = -0.99, 95% CI = -2.29 to 0.31; p=0.14).
  • In 5 studies, covering ODI scores, 2 showed no differences between the groups in short term results (MD= -6.54, 95% CI = -14.57 to 1.48; p=0.11) and 5 had no differences in long term results (MD= -2.01, 95% CI -11.75 to 7.73; p = 0.69).
  • 2 trials indicated no differences in operative times between KP and VP (MD = 4.47, 95% CI = -0.22 to 9.17; p=0.06).
  • 3 studies found no differences in short term kyphosis angle after operation (MD= -2.25, 95% CI= -5.14 to 0.65; p=0.13). However, in 4 trials, the long term kyphosis angle was better with KP (MD=-2.64, 95% CI = -4.66 to -0.61; p=0.01).
  • 4 trials reported better anterior height restoration of the vertebral body in KP (MD= 3.67, 95% CI =1.40 to 5.94; p =0.002).
  • 9 studies also suggested a lower cement leakage rate in KP (RR=0.70, 95% CI =0.52 to 0.95; p=0.02).
  • In 7 trials, no differences were seen between two procedures in adjacent vertebral compression fractures (RR=1.52, 95% CI = 0.76 to 3.03; p = 0.24).
Che cosa devo ricordare di più?

The analyzed data suggested that kyphoplasty and vertebroplasty had similar operative time, pain relief, and functional scores in the treatment of osteoporotic vertebral compression fractures. However, kyphoplasty resulted in better long term kyphosis angle, restoration of vertebral body height, and lower risk of cement leakage.

Come influenzerà l'assistenza ai miei pazienti?

Although the study supports the use of kyphoplasty for better kyphosis angle, vertebral height restoration, and lower risk of cement leakages, the methodological quality and risk of bias of the studies was poor. Further trials still need to be conducted on this topic.

DISCLAIMER

Il contenuto di questa pagina è solo a scopo informativo e non intende sostituire la consulenza, la diagnosi o il trattamento medico professionale. Se ha bisogno di cure mediche, si rivolga sempre al suo medico o al pronto soccorso più vicino. Le opinioni, le convinzioni e i punti di vista espressi dalle persone sui contenuti presenti in questa pagina non riflettono le opinioni, le convinzioni e i punti di vista di OrthoEvidence.

0 di 4 articoli mensili GRATUITI sbloccati
Ha raggiunto il suo limite di 4 visualizzazioni di articoli gratuiti questo mese

Accesso a OrthoEvidence a soli 1,99 dollari a settimana.

Rimanga in contatto con le ultime prove. Può disdire in qualsiasi momento.
  • Valutazioni critiche dei più recenti studi randomizzati controllati ad alto impatto e delle revisioni sistematiche in ortopedia.
  • Accesso ai contenuti del podcast OrthoEvidence, tra cui collaborazioni con il Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery, interviste con chirurghi di fama internazionale e tavole rotonde su notizie e argomenti ortopedici.
  • Abbonamento a The Pulse, una newsletter bisettimanale basata sulle evidenze scientifiche, progettata per aiutarla a prendere decisioni cliniche migliori.
Upgrade
Bentornato!
Ha dimenticato la password?
Inizi la sua prova gratuita oggi stesso!

Il suo account sarà affiliato a
e includerà l'accesso gratuito a OrthoEvidence


O
Ha dimenticato la password?

O
Controlli la sua e-mail

Se esiste un account con l'indirizzo e-mail fornito, le verrà inviata un'e-mail di reimpostazione della password. Se non vede l'e-mail, controlli la cartella spam o posta indesiderata.

Per ulteriore assistenza, contatti il nostro team di supporto.

Effettui il login per abilitare questa funzione

Per accedere a questa funzione, deve essere collegato ad un account OrthoEvidence attivo. Effettui il login o crei un account di prova GRATUITO.

Tradurre il Rapporto ACE

OrthoEvidence utilizza un servizio di traduzione di terze parti per rendere i contenuti accessibili in più lingue. Si prega di notare che, sebbene venga fatto ogni sforzo per garantire l'accuratezza, le traduzioni potrebbero non essere sempre perfette.

Come citare questo documento ACE Report

OrthoEvidence. Kyphoplasty superior to vertebroplasty for osteoporotic vertebral compression fractures. OE Journal. 2013;1(13):23. Available from: https://myorthoevidence.com/AceReport/Show/kyphoplasty-superior-to-vertebroplasty-for-osteoporotic-vertebral-compression-fractures

Copiare la citazione
Effettui il login per abilitare questa funzione

Per accedere a questa funzione, deve essere collegato ad un account OrthoEvidence attivo. Effettui il login o crei un account di prova GRATUITO.

Funzionalità per i membri Premium

Per accedere a questa funzione, deve essere collegato ad un account OrthoEvidence Premium.

Condividi questo articolo ACE Report