MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4412708153 · doi:10.1186/s12891-025-08945-w

Risk factors of residual back pain after vertebral augmentation in osteoporotic vertebral compression fracture patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis

2025· review· en· W4412708153 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Haozhong Wang, Hao Zhang, Changming Xiao, Kaiquan Zhang, Lijuan Qi

Bibliographic record

VenueBMC Musculoskeletal Disorders · 2025
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSpinal Fractures and Fixation Techniques
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineOdds ratioMeta-analysisSports medicineConfidence intervalCochrane LibraryInternal medicineOsteoporosisBack painRheumatologyOrthopedic surgerySurgeryPhysical therapyPathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Residual back pain (RBP) following vertebral augmentation negatively impacts clinical satisfaction and compromises both the physical and psychological well-being of affected patients. This meta-analysis aimed to identify risk factors associated with RBP after vertebral augmentation in patients with osteoporotic vertebral compression fractures (OVCF). METHODS: We searched literature in the PubMed, Embase, Web of Science and Cochrane Library. PRISMA guidelines were followed in this review. The Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS) were used to evaluate the quality of included studies. Odds ratio (OR), mean difference (MD) and 95% confidence interval (CI) of potential risk factors were calculated via RevMan5.4. RESULTS: A total of 11 studies and 3290 patients were included in this meta-analysis. 12 risk factors were assessed and the outcome showed that lower BMD (MD = 0.39, 95% CI 0.27 ~ 0.52, p < 0.01), lower BMI (MD = -1.22, 95% CI -2.38 ~ -0.06, p = 0.04), depression (OR = 2.72, 95% CI 1.48 ~ 5.01, p < 0.01), adjacent vertebral fracture (OR = 2.53, 95% CI 1.42 ~ 4.50, p < 0.01), posterior fascia injury (OR = 3.94, 95% CI 3.10 ~ 5.00, p < 0.01), intravertebral vacuum cleft (OR = 2.33, 95% CI 1.56 ~ 3.50, p < 0.01), severe paraspinal muscle degeneration (OR = 6.25, 95% CI 4.09 ~ 9.53, p < 0.01), facet joint violation (OR = 7.71, 95% CI 3.50 ~ 17.00, p < 0.01), unsatisfied bone cement distribution (OR = 2.82, 95% CI 1.67 ~ 4.76, p < 0.01), less bone cement volume (MD = -0.24, 95% CI -0.45 ~ -0.03, p = 0.02), less recovery rate of anterior vertebral height (MD = -3.46, 95% CI -6.22 ~ -6.09, p = 0.01), less postoperative local kyphosis correction rate (MD = -4.74, 95% CI -6.43 ~ -3.06, p < 0.01) were associated with postoperative RBP in OVCF patients. CONCLUSION: Lower BMD, lower BMI, depression, adjacent vertebral fracture, posterior fascia injury, intravertebral vacuum cleft, severe paraspinal muscle degeneration, facet joint violation, unsatisfied bone cement distribution, less bone cement volume, less recovery rate of anterior vertebral height, and less postoperative local kyphosis correction rate were associated with an increased risk of RBP after vertebral augmentation in OVCF patients. Early identification and targeted management of high-risk patients may help reduce RBP incidence.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.008
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.017
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (broad)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Meta-analysis · Consensus signal: Meta-analysis
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.984
Threshold uncertainty score0.040

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.017
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0030.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0160.036
Bibliometrics0.0050.006
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.020
GPT teacher head0.328
Teacher spread0.308 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

Study designMeta-analysis
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBMC Musculoskeletal DisordersSame topicSpinal Fractures and Fixation TechniquesFrench-language works237,207