[Retracted] Clinical Evaluation of Unilateral Vertebroplasty for OVCF

Wen, Xiaoming; Zhang, Yan; Jiang, Wei; An, Wenbo; Zhang, Binggang; Liu, Jianjun

doi:https://doi.org/10.1155/2022/2037185

Emergency Medicine International

On this page

Abstract Results Discussion Conclusion Data Availability Conflicts of Interest Authors’ Contributions References Copyright Related Articles

Research Article Retraction

!

This article has been Retracted. To view the article details, please click the ‘Retraction’ tab above.

Special Issue

Application of Image Processing Technology in Emergency Medicine

View this Special Issue

Research Article | Open Access

Volume 2022 | Article ID 2037185 | https://doi.org/10.1155/2022/2037185

[Retracted] Clinical Evaluation of Unilateral Vertebroplasty for OVCF

Xiaoming Wen,¹Yan Zhang,¹Wei Jiang,¹Wenbo An,¹Binggang Zhang,¹and Jianjun Liu¹

Academic Editor: Hang Chen

Received28 Jun 2022

Revised02 Aug 2022

Accepted18 Aug 2022

Published30 Sept 2022

Abstract

Objective. To investigate the clinical evaluation of unilateral vertebroplasty for OVCF. Methods. A retrospective analysis was performed on 60 patients treated with PVP from January 2020 to December 2021. Patients were divided into two groups according to the treatment method, 30 patients in the PVP group received PVP and 30 patients in the PCVP group received PCVP. The VAS score, ODI score, bone cement dosage, and leakage were compared between the two groups preoperatively, immediately postoperatively, and 7 and 30 days postoperatively. Results. VAS scores in the PCVP and PVP groups before, immediately after, and 7 days after surgery were , and the difference was not statistically significant; ODI score in group 1 before surgery was not statistically significant (); bone cement injection volume in the PVP group was significantly higher than that in the PCVP group (), and the difference was statistically significant; the difference in bone cement leakage between the two groups was not statistically significant (). Conclusion. Under the same puncture conditions, the PCVP group used the method of injection while retreating to achieve a better bone cement dispersion effect by using less bone cement and achieving uniform dispersion of bone cement. It can relieve the patients’ back pain and improve the back function.

1. Research Methodology

1.1. General Information

A retrospective analysis was conducted on 30 OVCF patients (30 vertebral bodies) treated with PVP from January 2020 to December 2021 (PVP group) and 30 OVCF patients (30 vertebral bodies) treated with PCVP (PCVP group). All patients underwent preoperative bone mineral density examination to indicate severe osteoporosis. MR examination or ECT examination was performed to determine the fracture site and identify whether it was a fresh fracture.

1.2. Surgical Methods

All patients were prone on the hospital bed, and the operation area was anesthetized (5 ml, 0.1% lidocaine), routinely disinfected, and covered.

In the PVP group, unilateral needling is performed under c-arm guidance, usually with severe symptoms. If there was no significant difference in symptoms on both sides, the left side was selected for puncture. Fluoroscopy confirmed that the needle insertion position was good. The working sleeve was removed, and the wound was covered with a sterile dressing at the end of the drawing period and 2-3 minutes after injection. About 10 to 15 minutes after the injection, after confirming that the residual bone cement in vitro is completely solidified, the patient is turned to the supine position on the flat car with the cooperation of the nurse, then returned to the ward, and the operation is completed.

In the PCVP group, the PCVP operation was the same as that of the PVP. Usually, the side with severe symptoms was selected for puncture. A working cannulation with a diameter of 3.7 mm was selected for puncture and the needle position was confirmed by using fluoroscopy. In the responsible vertebral body, take out the angle syringe when necessary and inject bone cement. Pull out the angle syringe 1∼2 minutes after injection and then rotate and pull out the working sleeve. Cover the wound. About 10 to 15 minutes after the injection, after confirming that the residual bone cement in vitro is completely solidified, the patient is turned to the supine position on the flat car with the cooperation of the nurse, then returned to the ward, and the operation is completed.

1.3. Postoperative Treatment

After returning to the ward, the patient was instructed to stay in bed for 2 hours, asked to take a supine position, pain relief and symptomatic treatment according to the patient’s pain condition was provided, and was routinely given antiosteoporosis treatment. 2 hours after surgery, patients were instructed to walk moderately while wearing the waist circumference. According to the patient’s postoperative recovery, we planned to discharge the patient after DR examination and explained the preventive measures, postoperative follow-up, and regular antiosteoporosis matters. All patients successfully underwent the operation.

1.4. Observation Indicators

VAS score, ODI score, and bone cement injection volume were observed before surgery, immediately after surgery, and 7 days and 30 days after surgery.

Bone cement leakage rate: high-resolution CT plain scan was performed after operation, and cement leakage manifests beyond the vertebral body margins. Bone cement distribution and diffusion: select the layer with the largest bone cement distribution area in the CT image for plane division. On the cross section, the vertebral body was divided into two areas, left and right, in the middle, and each area was divided into 3 subareas, the front, middle, and rear, and each area was divided into 4 equal parts, for a total of 24 subareas. If bone cement covers the eight regions, then the distribution of bone cement can theoretically be considered ideal [1].

Pain evaluation [2]: pain was assessed on the Visual Analog Scale (VAS) from 0 to 10 at each time point. The higher the OVCF score, the higher the pain.

OSS Disability Index (ODI) [3]: the degree of disability increases with the OVCF score, which ranges from 0 to 100 according to the ODI score.

1.5. Statistical Processing

SPSS 22.0 software is used for data statistical analysis. The data of normal distribution were expressed as (), and the independent sample T test was used for intergroup comparison. The count data is represented by %, and the test method is . indicates statistically significant difference between groups.

2. Results

2.1. General Data

There was no statistical significance in the general data (, Table 1).

2.2. VAS Scores of Pain in Both Groups

As shown in Table 2, the VAS scores of pain in the PCVP and PVP groups preoperatively, postoperatively, and 1 week postoperatively were .

2.3. ODI Functional Index and Bone Cement Injection Volume before and after Surgery in Both Groups

The results of the data in Table 3 show that the ODI score before and after surgery in both groups () and the amount of bone cement injection in the PVP group were significantly higher than that in the PCVP group ().

2.4. Bone Cement Leakage and Dispersion in the Two Groups

As shown in Table 4, there was no significant difference in bone cement leakage between the two groups, .

3. A Typical Surgical Case

As shown in Figure 1, in the patient’s unilateral vertebroplasty, the curved puncture cannula was successfully punctured with satisfactory puncture results (Figures 1(a) and 1(b)). The angle of inclusion in the coronal plane was 27° (Figures 1(c) and 1(d)), and the injection of bone cement was successfully completed while retraction was taking place (Figures 1(e) and 1(f)). The postoperative CT images showed that the bone cement injection was symmetrically dispersed and evenly diffused (Figures 1(g) and 1(h)), and the surgical result was good.

(a)

(b)

(c)

(d)

(e)

(f)

(g)

(h)

4. Discussion

Some researchers believe [4] that the bilateral arch root approach is more advantageous for relieving patients’ postoperative low back pain because the relief of patients’ postoperative pain depends largely on the symmetrical distribution of bone cement in the injured vertebrae, which equalizes the stress in the injured vertebrae, which is one of the important mechanisms for pain relief. However, some studies [5] have shown that the use of unilateral pedicle approach with cement injection has been effective in restoring the height of the injured vertebral body, and the use of bilateral approach will undoubtedly increase the risk of surgery, prolong the operation time, and increase the X-ray exposure time of the patient, which may not be beneficial to the patient. The results of this study also confirm that the operative time and the number of X-ray exposures (time) were significantly higher in the bilateral group than in the unilateral group. Reference [6] suggests that there is no significant difference in recent clinical outcomes between bilateral and unilateral pedicle approaches for the treatment of osteoporotic vertebral compression fractures, and the question has mostly focused on which approach is more effective in terms of clinical outcomes (especially pain relief) for patients. Angled vertebroplasty is based on a unilateral puncture in which a nickel-titanium alloy guide pin with ultra-high elasticity and good metallic mechanical strength is delivered through a puncture cannula to the other side of the vertebral body, creating a lateral space to facilitate delivery of the cannula [7]. The anterior edge of the vertebral body midline is the outlet of the anterior cement, and the bone cement can diffuse laterally without resistance. The arc-shaped diffusion distribution ensures symmetrical distribution of the bone cement, allowing it to be evenly distributed on both sides of the vertebral body, with the same advantages as bilateral puncture. It is important to pay attention to the depth and direction of the puncture cannula to avoid puncturing the anterior edge of the vertebral body or the anterior part of the upper and lower end plates; thus, increasing the risk of bone cement leakage [8]. This study focuses on the application of PCVP in the treatment of OVCF.

Based on the PVP-modified PCVP, the bone cement can spread through the anterior part of the spine to the middle of the spine without increasing the puncture angle, and the injection site is highly mobile and symmetrically and uniformly distributed, which balances the strength of both sides of the vertebral body and solves the problem of uneven distribution of bone cement in traditional treatment, resulting in poor pain [9]. The comparison of pain scores between the two groups after surgery showed that there was no significant difference in visual scores between the PCVP and PVP groups preoperatively, postoperatively, and 7 days after surgery, indicating that PCVP and PVP can be very effective. Our results showed no statistically significant differences in ODI score, VAS scores, and PVP at 1 day, 2 months, and 6 months after PCVP. In addition, References [10, 11] and others have confirmed that PCVP has no significant advantage in relieving pain and improving spinal cord function.

Traditional OVCF vertebroplasty mainly consists of PVP and PKP. PVP usually requires increased cement injection to achieve diffusion, but also increases the risk of cement leakage as a result. If the PKP procedure is performed with balloon expansion, it can better restore the height of the injured vertebral body and compact the cancellous bone around the left cavity, forming an artificial barrier to prevent cement leakage. If PKP is performed by balloon expansion, the height of the injured vertebral body can be better restored, and the cancellous bone around the left cavity can be compacted to form an artificial barrier to prevent cement leakage and reduce the injection of bone cement. However, from a biomechanical point of view, References [12, 13] found that cement-induced increase in vertebral stiffness increases the risk of fracture of adjacent vertebrae. In addition, vertebral bone cement increases the likelihood of secondary Kummell’s disease [14, 15].

In angled vertebroplasty, an angled needle creates a small gap between the vertebral fractures and is injected posteriorly, and better spreading of the vertebrae and the same therapeutic results can be achieved with a small amount of bone cement [16]. Some studies even suggest that a large amount of bone cement filling should be limited to less than 5 ml, which can greatly reduce the leakage rate of bone cement [17]. In the early stage of injection, the bone cement had relatively good mobility and high dispersion in the vertebral body but with a high infiltration rate; in the late stage of injection, the bone cement had poor relative mobility, low dispersion in the vertebral body, uneven distribution, and low leakage rate [18]. In this study, we found that the amount of bone cement injected in the PVP group was significantly higher than that in the PCVP group, and the difference was statistically significant. References [19, 20] also confirmed that there was also no significant difference in bone cement leakage between the two groups, which is consistent with the present study. This is related to the fact that the surgeons in the surgical group may have a long history of PVP and have extensive clinical experience in reducing bone cement leakage.

5. Conclusion

In patients with OVCF, the injection was performed by the method of injection while retreating under the same puncture conditions, and the use of less bone cement can achieve uniform dispersion of bone cement, which can achieve better dispersion of bone cement, relieve patients’ back pain, and improve back function. However, this study has disadvantages such as small sample size, no long-term follow-up, and only patients with newly occurred vertebral compression fractures were included, and the evaluation of postoperative vertebral stability and whether fractures occurred need further improvement, and the results may be biased, and more in-depth studies will be conducted in the next step.

Data Availability

The simulation experiment data used to support the findings of this study are available from the corresponding author upon request.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare that there are no conflicts of interest regarding the publication of this paper.

Authors’ Contributions

Xiaoming Wen and Yan Zhang contributed equally to this work.

References

Q. Zhou, H. Liu, H. Kou et al., “Early efficacy evaluation of curved vertebroplasty device and its influence on bone cement distribution,” Chinese Journal of Orthopaedic Surgery, vol. 25, no. 10, pp. 892–897, 2017.
View at: Google Scholar
Anonymity, “Visual analog scoring method,” Journal of Clinical and Experimental Medicine, vol. 12, no. 23, p. 1925, 2013.
View at: Google Scholar
G. Tang, Q. Yang, J. Hou, Z. He, X. Sun, and Y. Song, “Comparison of unilateral and bilateral kyphoplasty for osteoporotic vertebral fractures,” Chinese Journal of Orthopaedic Surgery, vol. 29, no. 10, pp. 939–942, 2021.
View at: Google Scholar
Z. D. Cui, G. Yang, and D. P. Zhang, “[Clinical efficacy and radiation exposure analysis of vertebroplasty and curved vertebroplasty in the treatment of osteoporotic vertebral compression fracture],” Zhong Guo Gu Shang, vol. 34, no. 8, pp. 725–731, 2021.
View at: Google Scholar
G. Yao, Y. X. Shen, M. Li, and B. Cai, “[Biomechanical effects of different bone cement diffusion patterns after vertebroplasty: finite element analysis],” Zhongguo Gu Shang, vol. 34, no. 8, pp. 732–737, 2021.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
S. Marcia, M. Muto, J. A. Hirsch et al., “What is the role of vertebral augmentation for osteoporotic fractures? a review of the recent literature,” Neuroradiology, vol. 60, no. 8, pp. 777–783, 2018.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
L. Wen, Y. Liu, C. Guang et al., “Comparison of the efficacy of modified PVP and PCVP techniques through unilateral puncture at the root of the transverse process in the treatment of lumbar osteoporotic fractures,” Journal of Neck and Low Back Pain, vol. 41, no. 2, p. 4, 2020.
View at: Google Scholar
Q. Cao, M. Duan, L. Zhang, Y. Feng, Y. Zhou, and J. Wang, “Analysis of the effect of manual reduction of PCVP and unilateral PKP in the treatment of osteoporotic vertebral compression fractures,” Clinical Misdiagnosis and Mistreatment, vol. 34, no. 2, p. 5, 2021.
View at: Google Scholar
S. Fang, J. Min, Z. Zeng et al., “Analysis of risk factors for refracture of adjacent vertebral bodies after percutaneous vertebral dilatation and balloon kyphoplasty,” China Orthopedics, vol. 34, no. 8, pp. 705–709, 2021.
View at: Google Scholar
Q. Deng, X. Qiao, Z. Li et al., “Investigation of risk factors for non-operative vertebral refracture after osteoporotic vertebral compression fracture,” Chinese Journal of Osteoporosis, vol. 27, no. 4, pp. 613–617, 2021.
View at: Google Scholar
Y. Li, J. Shu, Z. Wang et al., “Effect of teriparatide on residual low backpain after percutaneous kyphoplasty for osteoporotic vertebral compression fractures,” Chinese Journal of Traumatology, vol. 38, no. 3, pp. 198–204, 2022.
View at: Google Scholar
X. Y. Xu, D. M. Luo, S. L. Liu, X. T. Shen, Z. Y. Zhou, and G. D. Yuan, “[Treatment of severely osteoporotic vertebral compression fractures with the vertebral body stent system and percutanous kyphoplasty combined with zoledronic acid],” Zhongguo Gu Shang, vol. 33, no. 9, pp. 827–830, 2020.
View at: Google Scholar
Y. Sun, H. Ma, F. Yang, X. Tang, P. Yi, and M. Tan, “Clinical efficacy and safety of zoledronic acid combined with PVP/PKP in the treatment of osteoporotic vertebral compression fracture: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials,” BioMed Research International, vol. 2021, Article ID 6650358, 2021.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
D. Wang, Y. Li, H. Yin et al., “Three-dimensional finite element analysis of optimal distribution model of vertebroplasty,” Annals of Palliative Medicine, vol. 9, no. 3, pp. 1062–1072, 2020.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
N. Zhang, F. Cai, C. Li, and F. Wang, “Comparison of the effect of manual reduction combined with angle percutaneous vertebroplasty and percutaneous kyphoplasty alone in the treatment of osteoporotic vertebral compression fractures,” China Medical Herald, vol. 18, no. 21, pp. 79–83, 2021.
View at: Google Scholar
L. Tan, B. Wen, Z. Guo, and Z. Chen, “The effect of bone cement distribution on the outcome of percutaneous Vertebroplasty: a case cohort study,” BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders, vol. 21, no. 1, pp. 541–547, 2020.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
H. B. Sun, X. S. Jing, G. Q. Zhang, Y. Hai, Y. Z. Liu, and D. C. Wang, “Preliminary study of obese patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease suffering from painful osteoporotic vertebral compression fracture treated by percutaneous vertebroplasty in improved prone position and right lateral position,” World Neurosurgery, vol. 130, pp. e933–e940, 2019.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
Y. Cheng and Y. Liu, “Percutaneous curved vertebroplasty in the treatment of thoracolumbar osteoporotic vertebral compression fractures,” Journal of International Medical Research, vol. 47, no. 6, pp. 2424–2433, 2019.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
Z. G. Sun, H. H. Yang, H. Li, W. Weng, and J. K. Min, “Guiding significance of lumbar quantitative computed tomography in percutaneous vertebroplasty for osteoporotic vertebral compression fractures,” Zhongguo Gu Shang = China Journal of Orthopaedics and Traumatology, vol. 33, no. 2, pp. 111–115, 2020.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
C. Gu, A. Huang, Y. Wang et al., “Biomechanics of the unilateral posterosuperior, unipedicular, and bipedicular approaches for treatment by percutaneous vertebroplasty: a comparative study,” American Journal of Tourism Research, vol. 14, no. 5, pp. 3448–3455, 2022.
View at: Google Scholar
M. Yates and H. N. Shastri, “The oswestry disability index,” Occupational Medicine, vol. 67, no. 3, 2017.
View at: Google Scholar
J. S. Park and Y. S. Park, “Survival analysis and risk factors of new vertebral fracture after vertebroplasty for osteoporotic vertebral compression fracture,” The Spine Journal, vol. 21, no. 8, pp. 1355–1361, 2021.
View at: Google Scholar

Copyright

Copyright © 2022 Xiaoming Wen et al. This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

PDF Download Citation

Download other formats

Order printed copies

Views

225

Downloads

403

Citations