Spine Section, Department of Orthopaedics, University Hospital of Odense, Odense, Denmark.
Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2010 Mar 1;35(5):478-82. doi: 10.1097/BRS.0b013e3181b71bd1.
STUDY DESIGN: Clinical randomized study. OBJECTIVE: Percutaneous vertebroplasty is compared to conservative treatment in patients with acute or subacute osteoporotic vertebral fractures with respect to pain, physical and mental outcomes. The risk of vertebral fractures adjacent to treated levels is assessed. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: There are some disagreements of the benefits of PVP for the treatment of acute osteoporotic vertebral fractures, but the long-term clinical outcome of PVP compared to conservative treatment has not been evaluated in a randomized study. METHODS: The 3-months follow-up of this study has been published previously, and here we report the completed 12-months analysis. About 50 patients (41 females) were included from January 2001 until January 2008. Patients with vertebral fractures less than 8 weeks old were included and randomized to either PVP or conservative treatment. Pain was assessed with a visual analogue scale. Physical and mental outcomes were assessed by validated questionnaires and tests. Tests, questionnaires, and plain radiographs were performed at the inclusion and after 3 and 12 months. RESULTS: Pain score before and after the operation in the PVP group was 7.9 and 2.0, respectively. There was no difference between the groups concerning pain at the 3- and 12-months follow-up. Supplementary assessment of back pain 1 month after discharge from hospital showed a significant lower VAS score in the PVP group over the conservative group. In the study period, 2 adjacent fractures in the PVP group and no adjacent fractures in the conservative group were registered. CONCLUSION: PVP is a good treatment for some patients with acute/subacute painful osteoporotic vertebral fractures, but the majority of fractures will heal after 8 to 12 weeks of conservative treatment with subsequent decline in pain. The risk of new fractures needs further research.
研究设计:临床随机研究。
目的:比较经皮椎体成形术与保守治疗在急性或亚急性骨质疏松性椎体骨折患者中的疼痛、身心结局。评估治疗水平相邻椎体骨折的风险。
背景资料总结:对于经皮椎体成形术治疗急性骨质疏松性椎体骨折的益处存在一些分歧,但在随机研究中尚未评估经皮椎体成形术与保守治疗的长期临床结局。
方法:本研究的 3 个月随访结果先前已发表,现报告完成的 12 个月分析结果。2001 年 1 月至 2008 年 1 月期间共纳入约 50 例患者(41 例女性)。纳入的患者为骨折时间不足 8 周的患者,并随机分为经皮椎体成形术或保守治疗组。疼痛采用视觉模拟评分法评估。身心结局采用经过验证的问卷和测试进行评估。在纳入时、3 个月和 12 个月时进行测试、问卷和普通 X 线片检查。
结果:经皮椎体成形术组手术前后的疼痛评分分别为 7.9 和 2.0,组间在 3 个月和 12 个月随访时的疼痛无差异。出院后 1 个月对腰背疼痛的补充评估显示,经皮椎体成形术组的 VAS 评分明显低于保守治疗组。在研究期间,经皮椎体成形术组有 2 例相邻骨折,而保守治疗组无相邻骨折。
结论:经皮椎体成形术是治疗部分急性/亚急性疼痛性骨质疏松性椎体骨折患者的有效方法,但大多数骨折在保守治疗 8-12 周后会愈合,疼痛随后减轻。新发骨折的风险需要进一步研究。
Zhongguo Xiu Fu Chong Jian Wai Ke Za Zhi. 2013-7
Ned Tijdschr Geneeskd. 2003-8-9
J Vasc Interv Radiol. 2011-5-14
J Orthop Surg Res. 2025-8-30
Acta Orthop Traumatol Turc. 2025-3-17
Indian J Orthop. 2024-3-25
Front Endocrinol (Lausanne). 2023