Division of Interventional Neuroradiology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, 55 Fruit Street, Gray 241, Boston, MA 02114, USA.
J Vasc Interv Radiol. 2010 Oct;21(10):1548-53. doi: 10.1016/j.jvir.2010.06.015.
To evaluate the safety and effectiveness of a curved needle compared with traditional (noncurved needle) techniques in a large single-center experience.
This study was a retrospective analysis of 243 consecutive vertebral augmentation procedures over a 17-month period. Curved needle procedures were compared with noncurved needle procedures for baseline clinical variables, complication rate, pain relief, and improvement in disability. Procedure duration and fluoroscopy time were compared between the two cohorts.
Between curved needle and noncurved needle procedures, there were no statistically significant differences in the baseline clinical variables, fracture location, and fracture etiology. No complications were noted in either group. In both groups, there was a median improvement in the visual analog scale (VAS) score of 2.0 points (P = .62). More than 90% of procedures in both groups resulted in some pain improvement (P = .78). For both groups, the median improvement in disability on the Roland Morris Disability Questionnaire (RMDQ) was 4.0 points (P = .69). Approximately 70% of procedures in both groups resulted in improvement in disability (P = 1.00). In single-level cases, there were shorter procedure times (51.8 min ± 2.7 vs 62.8 min ± 2.2, P = .002) and shorter fluoroscopy times (P = .31) for curved needle procedures.
The curved needle is as safe and effective as traditional vertebral augmentation techniques in treating the pain and disability related to vertebral compression fractures. Additionally, the curved needle is associated with shorter procedure duration and reduced fluoroscopy time.
在一项大型单中心经验中，评估与传统（非弯曲针）技术相比，弯曲针的安全性和有效性。
这是一项回顾性分析，研究对象为在 17 个月内连续进行的 243 例椎体增强术。将弯曲针程序与非弯曲针程序进行比较，比较基线临床变量、并发症发生率、疼痛缓解和残疾改善。比较两组之间的手术时间和透视时间。
在弯曲针和非弯曲针程序之间，基线临床变量、骨折位置和骨折病因无统计学差异。两组均未发生并发症。两组的视觉模拟评分（VAS）中位数均提高了 2.0 分（P =.62）。两组中超过 90%的手术均有一定程度的疼痛改善（P =.78）。两组的 Roland Morris 残疾问卷（RMDQ）残疾中位数均提高了 4.0 点（P =.69）。两组中约 70%的手术均可改善残疾（P = 1.00）。在单节段病例中，弯曲针手术的手术时间（51.8 分钟±2.7 与 62.8 分钟±2.2，P =.002）和透视时间（P =.31）更短。
与传统的椎体增强技术相比，弯曲针治疗与椎体压缩性骨折相关的疼痛和残疾既安全又有效。此外，弯曲针与较短的手术时间和减少的透视时间相关。
