Percutaneous Treatment of Vertebral Compression Fractures
Bibliographic record
Abstract
STUDY DESIGN AND OBJECTIVE: This study performs a meta-analysis to compare complication rates from vertebroplasty (VP) and kyphoplasty (KP). SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Recently, the development of VP and balloon KP has been shown to provide symptomatic relief and restoration of sagittal alignment of vertebral compression fractures refractory to medical therapy. Complications in treatment of vertebral compression fractures are rare, however can be potentially devastating. Fortunately, clinical sequelae are rare; however, severe clinical complications from cement extravasation have been reported. METHODS: Using PubMed and Ovid, we performed a literature search for "kyphoplasty," "vertebroplasty," and "vertebral augmentation." This search was performed in December 2006. Case reports and reports not available in English were excluded. We categorized complications in 3 categories: (1) procedure-related complications, (2) medical complications, and (3) new vertebral fracture. Cement leakage, asymptomatic and symptomatic, and its locations were recorded. We performed a meta-analysis of complications of all studies. We then repeated the meta-analysis examining only prospective studies. We then used proportion analysis to determine statistical significance. We defined statistical significance as a P value less than 0.05. RESULTS: We identified 121 reports of KP and/or VP that specifically addressed complications. Of these studies, 33 addressed KP and 82 addressed VP (6 reports addressed complications of both). There were 29 reports in which the data appeared to be collected prospectively. Of these, 9 addressed KP and 21 addressed VP.VP was found to have a significantly increased rate of procedure-related complications than KP in the analysis of all studies and only prospective studies. VP also appears to have a significantly higher rate of symptomatic and asymptomatic cement leakage than KP (P < 0.05). The incidence of medical complications was significantly higher in the KP procedure; however, this difference was not observed when analyzing only prospective studies. The incidence of new fracture was significantly higher in the VP procedure; however, this was not observed when analyzing only prospective studies. CONCLUSION: VP and KP are 2 minimally invasive procedures that have been shown to be effective in the treatment of symptomatic vertebral compression fractures. Although the incidence of adverse events for both VP and KP are low, it appears that VP is associated with a statistically significant increased rate of procedure-related complications and cement extravasation (symptomatic and asymptomatic). Future prospective studies with large patient enrollment will be needed to further validate the finding of this meta-analysis.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.008 | 0.018 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.006 | 0.022 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".