Safety, effectiveness and predictors for early reoperation in therapeutic and prophylactic vertebroplasty: short-term results of a prospective case series of patients with osteoporotic vertebral fractures

Peter Diel, Lorenz Freiburghaus, Christoph Röder, Lorin Michael Benneker, Albrecht Popp, Gosia Perler, Paul Ferdinand Heini, Peter Diel, Lorenz Freiburghaus, Christoph Röder, Lorin Michael Benneker, Albrecht Popp, Gosia Perler, Paul Ferdinand Heini

Abstract

Introduction: Vertebroplasty (VP) is a cost-efficient alternative to kyphoplasty; however, regarding safety and vertebral body (VB) height restoration, it is considered inferior. We assessed the safety and efficacy of VP in alleviating pain, improving quality of life (QoL) and restoring alignment.

Methods: In a prospective monocenter case series from May 2007 until July 2008, there were 1,408 vertebroplasties performed during 319 interventions in 306 patients with traumatic, lytic and osteoporotic fractures. The 249 interventions in 233 patients performed because of osteoporotic vertebral fractures were analyzed regarding demographics, treatment and radiographic details, pain alleviation (VAS), QoL improvement (NASS and EQ-5D), complications and predictors for new fractures requiring a reoperation.

Results: The osteoporotic patient sample consisted of 76.7% (179) females with a median age of 80 years. A total of 54 males had a median age of 77 years. On average, there were 1.8 VBs fractured and 5 VBs treated. The preoperative pain was assessed by the visual analog scale (VAS) and decreased from 54.9 to 40.4 pts after 2 months and 31.2 pts after 6 months. Accordingly, the QoL on the EQ-5D measure (-0.6 to 1) improved from 0.35 pts before surgery to 0.56 pts after 2 and to 0.68 pts after 6 months. The preoperative Beck Index (anterior height/posterior height) improved from a mean of 0.64 preoperative to 0.76 postoperative, remained stable at 2 months and slightly deteriorated to 0.72 at 6 months postoperatively. There were cement leakages in 26% of the fractured VBs and in 1.4% of the prophylactically cemented VBs; there were symptoms in 4.3%, and most of them were temporary hypotension and one pulmonary cement embolism that remained asymptomatic. The univariate regression model revealed a tendency for a reduced risk for new or refractures on radiographs (OR = 2.61, 95% CI 0.92-7.38, p = 0.12) and reoperations (OR = 2.9, 95% CI 0.94-8.949, p = 0.1) when prophylactic augmentation was performed. The final multivariate regression model revealed male patients to have an about three times higher refracture risk (radiographic) (OR = 2.78, p = 0.02) at 6 months after surgery. Patients with a lumbar index fracture had an about three to five times higher refracture/reoperation risk than patients with a thoracic (OR = 0.33/0.35, p = 0.009/0.01) or thoracolumbar (OR = 0.32/0.22, p = 0.099/0.01) index fracture.

Conclusion: If routinely used, VP is a safe and efficacious treatment option for osteoporotic vertebral fractures with regard to pain relief and improvement of the QoL. Even segmental realignment can be partially achieved with proper patient positioning. Certain patient or fracture characteristics increase the risk for early radiographic refractures or new fractures, or a reoperation; a consequent prophylactic augmentation showed protective tendencies, but the study was underpowered for a final conclusion.

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
Comorbidity profile of the patient group with osteoporotic fractures
Fig. 2
Fig. 2
Frequency of cemented and fractured vertebral bodies
Fig. 3
Fig. 3
Direction of cement extrusions

Source: PubMed

3
订阅