Is vertebral body stenting in combination with CaP cement superior to kyphoplasty?

Autor: Schützenberger S; AUVA Trauma Center Meidling, Vienna, Austria. sebastian.schuetzenberger@auva.at., Schwarz SM; AUVA Trauma Center Meidling, Vienna, Austria., Greiner L; AUVA Trauma Center Meidling, Vienna, Austria., Holub O; AUVA Trauma Center Meidling, Vienna, Austria., Grabner S; AUVA Trauma Center Meidling, Vienna, Austria., Huf W; Karl Landsteiner Institute for Clinical Risk Management, Vienna, Austria., Sailler A; AUVA Trauma Center Meidling, Vienna, Austria., Fialka C; AUVA Trauma Center Meidling, Vienna, Austria.
Jazyk: angličtina
Zdroj: European spine journal : official publication of the European Spine Society, the European Spinal Deformity Society, and the European Section of the Cervical Spine Research Society [Eur Spine J] 2018 Oct; Vol. 27 (10), pp. 2602-2608. Date of Electronic Publication: 2018 Aug 11.
DOI: 10.1007/s00586-018-5717-7
Abstrakt: Purpose: In the evolution of the minimally invasive treatment of vertebral compression fractures, vertebral body stenting (VBS) was developed to reduce intraoperative and secondary loss of vertebral height. Particularly in combination with the usage of biodegradable cement, the influence of VBS on the rate of intraoperative complications and long-term outcome is unclear. The purpose of this study was to investigate the differences between balloon kyphoplasty (BKP) and VBS regarding their long-term clinical and radiological outcome in combination with calcium phosphate (CaP) application instead of polymethyl methacrylate (PMMA).
Methods: This retrospective study included 49 patients with fresh mono-segmental thoracolumbar fractures without neurological signs treated with VBS or BKP and CaP cement (Calcibone). The outcome was evaluated with the visual analogue pain scale (VAS), the Oswestry disability score (ODI), and radiologically assessed.
Results: In the course of the radiological follow-up, the VBS group showed statistically significant less vertebral height loss than the BKP group. However, with respect to VAS and ODI scores there were no statistically significant differences between the VBS and BKP group in the clinical follow-up. The rate of cement leakage was comparable in both groups.
Conclusions: Both techniques facilitated good clinical results in combination with absorbable cement augmentation. In particular, the VBS enabled us to benefit from the advantages of the resorbable isothermic CaP cement with an improved radiological outcome in the long term compared to BKP. However, there was a mentionable loss of reduction in the follow-up in both groups compared to previously published data with PMMA cement. These slides can be retrieved under Electronic Supplementary Material.
Databáze: MEDLINE
Externí odkaz: