• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

球囊扩张椎体后凸成形术与新型 Kiva® VCF 系统治疗椎体压缩性骨折的比较。

Comparison of balloon kyphoplasty with the new Kiva® VCF system for the treatment of vertebral compression fractures.

出版信息

Pain Physician. 2013 Sep-Oct;16(5):E505-12.

PMID:24077200
Abstract

BACKGROUND

Vertebral compression fractures are common among the elderly, which is conditioned by osteoporosis. They cause back pain and limit the patient's activities. The Kiva® VCF Treatment System is a new device to treat vertebral compression fractures. Compared to other methods, the utilization of the Kiva System reduces the risk for complications and delivers improvements in back pain reduction and functionality.

OBJECTIVES

Evaluation of safety and effectiveness of the Kiva System in comparison to balloon kyphoplasty on the basis of matched pairs.

METHODS

52 patients (47 - 89 years, 68 fractures) were treated with balloon kyphoplasty or with the new Kiva System. Back pain and impairment of motility were assessed preoperatively and 6 months postoperatively, with the Visual Analog Scale (VAS) and Oswestry Disability Index (ODI). The operation time and cement extravasation were recorded. Control radiographs were evaluated for new fractures and vertebral heights.

RESULTS

Mean VAS values in both groups improved from preoperatively 87.6 ± 12.8 and 83.1 ± 14.9 to 10.8 ± 20.8 and 24.6 ± 11.0 6 months after the treatment. The improvement after 6 months in the Kiva group was significantly better than in the balloon kyphoplasty group (P < 0.0001). Mean ODI scores in both groups also improved from 68.7% ± 15.8% in the Kiva group and 80.6% ± 8.6% in the balloon kyphoplasty group preoperatively to 24.8 ± 18.6% and 33.2 ± 6.3% 6 months after treatment. The mean operation time for the Kiva group was 12.7 ± 3.7 minutes per vertebra and cement leakage occurred in 6 patients. The mean operation time for the balloon kyphoplasty group was 34.1 ± 7.0 minutes per vertebra and cement leakage occurred in 8 patients. Anterior and mid vertebral height in the Kiva group increased from preoperatively 21.06 ± 7.44 mm and 18.36 ± 5.64 mm to postoperatively 22.41 ± 7.14 mm and 20.41 ± 6.00 mm. Anterior and mid vertebral height in the balloon kyphoplasty group increased from preoperatively 21.68 ± 2.06 mm and 21.97 ± 1.78 mm to postoperatively 25.09 ± 2.54 mm and 25.29 ± 2.10 mm. Vertebral height restoration could be therefore maintained with both procedures for 6 months. In the Kiva group 2 cases of nonadjacent fractures and one case of adjacent fractures were observed. In the balloon kyphoplasty group 9 cases of adjacent, as well as 5 cases of nonadjacent, fractures were observed. In the Kiva group significant fewer fractures occurred.

LIMITATIONS

The study includes only 26 patients for each procedure, which were compared on the basis of matched pairs.

CONCLUSION

The Kiva System appears to be a safe and effective procedure for the treatment of vertebral compression fractures. Six months after treatment with the Kiva System, better VAS values than the values after the treatment with balloon kyphoplasty were recorded. Reduction in functional impairment was as successful as it was after balloon kyphoplasty. Vertebral height restoration was observed in both groups, which was sustained for 6 months. The risk of cement extravasation during the Kiva Treatment is nearly the same as in balloon kyphoplasty; however, it requires a shorter operation time and produces less new fractures.

摘要

背景

椎体压缩性骨折在老年人中很常见,这是由骨质疏松症引起的。它们会导致背痛,并限制患者的活动。Kiva®VCF 治疗系统是一种治疗椎体压缩性骨折的新设备。与其他方法相比,Kiva 系统的使用降低了并发症的风险,并改善了背痛减轻和功能恢复。

目的

基于配对比较,评估 Kiva 系统与球囊扩张椎体后凸成形术治疗椎体压缩性骨折的安全性和有效性。

方法

52 例患者(47-89 岁,68 处骨折)分别接受球囊扩张椎体后凸成形术或新型 Kiva 系统治疗。术前和术后 6 个月采用视觉模拟评分(VAS)和 Oswestry 功能障碍指数(ODI)评估背痛和活动受限情况。记录手术时间和骨水泥渗漏情况。对照 X 线片评估新发骨折和椎体高度。

结果

两组 VAS 值均从术前的 87.6±12.8 和 83.1±14.9 改善至术后 6 个月的 10.8±20.8 和 24.6±11.0。Kiva 组治疗后 6 个月的改善明显优于球囊扩张椎体后凸成形术组(P<0.0001)。两组 ODI 评分也从术前的 Kiva 组 68.7%±15.8%和球囊扩张椎体后凸成形术组 80.6%±8.6%改善至术后 6 个月的 24.8±18.6%和 33.2±6.3%。Kiva 组的平均手术时间为每椎体 12.7±3.7 分钟,6 例发生骨水泥渗漏。球囊扩张椎体后凸成形术组的平均手术时间为每椎体 34.1±7.0 分钟,8 例发生骨水泥渗漏。Kiva 组治疗前后的椎体前缘和中部高度分别从术前的 21.06±7.44mm 和 18.36±5.64mm 增加到术后的 22.41±7.14mm 和 20.41±6.00mm。球囊扩张椎体后凸成形术组治疗前后的椎体前缘和中部高度分别从术前的 21.68±2.06mm 和 21.97±1.78mm 增加到术后的 25.09±2.54mm 和 25.29±2.10mm。因此,两种方法均可在 6 个月内维持椎体高度的恢复。Kiva 组有 2 例非相邻骨折和 1 例相邻骨折,球囊扩张椎体后凸成形术组有 9 例相邻骨折和 5 例非相邻骨折。Kiva 组的骨折发生率明显较低。

局限性

本研究每组仅包括 26 例患者,基于配对比较进行比较。

结论

Kiva 系统似乎是一种安全有效的治疗椎体压缩性骨折的方法。治疗后 6 个月,Kiva 系统治疗的 VAS 值优于球囊扩张椎体后凸成形术治疗的 VAS 值。功能障碍的减轻与球囊扩张椎体后凸成形术一样成功。两组均观察到椎体高度恢复,且持续 6 个月。Kiva 治疗过程中骨水泥渗漏的风险与球囊扩张椎体后凸成形术相似;然而,它需要更短的手术时间,并产生更少的新发骨折。

相似文献

1
Comparison of balloon kyphoplasty with the new Kiva® VCF system for the treatment of vertebral compression fractures.球囊扩张椎体后凸成形术与新型 Kiva® VCF 系统治疗椎体压缩性骨折的比较。
Pain Physician. 2013 Sep-Oct;16(5):E505-12.
2
Balloon kyphoplasty versus KIVA vertebral augmentation--comparison of 2 techniques for osteoporotic vertebral body fractures: a prospective randomized study.球囊椎体后凸成形术与 KIVA 椎体增强术——两种骨质疏松性椎体骨折治疗技术的比较:一项前瞻性随机研究。
Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2013 Feb 15;38(4):292-9. doi: 10.1097/BRS.0b013e31826b3aef.
3
[Comparison of clinical and radiological data in the treatment of patients with osteoporotic vertebral compression fractures using radiofrequency kyphoplasty or balloon kyphoplasty].[使用射频椎体后凸成形术或球囊椎体后凸成形术治疗骨质疏松性椎体压缩骨折患者的临床和放射学数据比较]
Z Orthop Unfall. 2012 Feb;150(1):56-61. doi: 10.1055/s-0031-1280122. Epub 2011 Oct 12.
4
Preliminary outcomes and efficacy of the first 360 consecutive kyphoplasties for the treatment of painful osteoporotic vertebral compression fractures.连续360例首次椎体后凸成形术治疗疼痛性骨质疏松性椎体压缩骨折的初步结果及疗效
Spine J. 2005 May-Jun;5(3):244-55. doi: 10.1016/j.spinee.2004.09.013.
5
Is kyphoplasty reliable for osteoporotic vertebral compression fracture with vertebral wall deficiency?球囊扩张椎体后凸成形术治疗伴椎壁缺损的骨质疏松性椎体压缩骨折是否可靠?
Injury. 2010 Apr;41(4):360-4. doi: 10.1016/j.injury.2009.09.033. Epub 2009 Nov 13.
6
[Clinical outcomes of percutaneous kyphoplasty under local anesthesia for osteoporotic vertebral compression fractures].局部麻醉下经皮椎体后凸成形术治疗骨质疏松性椎体压缩骨折的临床疗效
Zhonghua Yi Xue Za Zhi. 2013 Sep 3;93(33):2654-8.
7
Is Kiva implant advantageous to balloon kyphoplasty in treating osteolytic metastasis to the spine? Comparison of 2 percutaneous minimal invasive spine techniques: a prospective randomized controlled short-term study.Kiva植入物在治疗脊柱溶骨性转移方面比球囊椎体后凸成形术更具优势吗?两种经皮微创脊柱技术的比较:一项前瞻性随机对照短期研究。
Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2014 Feb 15;39(4):E231-9. doi: 10.1097/BRS.0000000000000112.
8
[Is height restoration possible with a comparatively smaller amount of cement in radiofrequency kyphoplasty using a monopedicle approach?].[在单椎弓根入路的射频椎体后凸成形术中使用相对少量的骨水泥能否实现身高恢复?]
Z Orthop Unfall. 2013 Apr;151(2):156-62. doi: 10.1055/s-0032-1328418. Epub 2013 Apr 25.
9
A prospective, international, randomized, noninferiority study comparing an implantable titanium vertebral augmentation device versus balloon kyphoplasty in the reduction of vertebral compression fractures (SAKOS study).一项前瞻性、国际性、随机、非劣效性研究,比较了植入式钛椎体增强装置与球囊扩张椎体后凸成形术在减少椎体压缩性骨折方面的疗效(SAKOS 研究)。
Spine J. 2019 Nov;19(11):1782-1795. doi: 10.1016/j.spinee.2019.07.009. Epub 2019 Jul 17.
10
Balloon kyphoplasty for vertebral compression fractures in solid organ transplant recipients: results of treatment and comparison with primary osteoporotic vertebral compression fractures.实体器官移植受者椎体压缩骨折的球囊后凸成形术:治疗结果及与原发性骨质疏松性椎体压缩骨折的比较
Spine J. 2006 Sep-Oct;6(5):494-9. doi: 10.1016/j.spinee.2006.01.011. Epub 2006 Jul 24.

引用本文的文献

1
Optimal management for osteoporotic vertebral compression fractures: a network meta-analysis.骨质疏松性椎体压缩骨折的最佳管理:一项网状Meta分析。
J Orthop Surg Res. 2025 Aug 30;20(1):810. doi: 10.1186/s13018-025-06233-w.
2
Analysis of Risk Factors for Augmented Vertebral Refracture After Percutaneous Kyphoplasty in Osteoporotic Vertebral Compression Fractures.骨质疏松性椎体压缩骨折经皮椎体后凸成形术后椎体再骨折的危险因素分析
J Clin Med. 2025 Jan 8;14(2):329. doi: 10.3390/jcm14020329.
3
Biomechanical Comparisons between One- and Two-Compartment Devices for Reconstructing Vertebrae by Kyphoplasty.
经皮椎体后凸成形术治疗椎体骨折中,单节段与双节段装置重建椎体的生物力学比较。
Bioengineering (Basel). 2024 Aug 5;11(8):795. doi: 10.3390/bioengineering11080795.
4
Mechanical Vertebral Body Augmentation Versus Conventional Balloon Kyphoplasty for Osteoporotic Thoracolumbar Compression Fractures: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Outcomes.机械椎体强化术与传统球囊后凸成形术治疗骨质疏松性胸腰椎压缩骨折:结局的系统评价与荟萃分析
Global Spine J. 2025 Mar;15(2):1356-1366. doi: 10.1177/21925682241261988. Epub 2024 Jun 18.
5
A Toolbox of Bone Consolidation for the Interventional Radiologist.介入放射医师的骨整合工具箱。
Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol. 2023 Nov;46(11):1447-1457. doi: 10.1007/s00270-023-03445-7. Epub 2023 May 10.
6
Innovative minimally invasive implants for osteoporosis vertebral compression fractures.用于骨质疏松性椎体压缩骨折的创新型微创植入物。
Front Med (Lausanne). 2023 Mar 20;10:1161174. doi: 10.3389/fmed.2023.1161174. eCollection 2023.
7
The American Society of Pain and Neuroscience (ASPN) Evidence-Based Clinical Guideline of Interventional Treatments for Low Back Pain.美国疼痛与神经科学学会(ASPN)关于腰痛介入治疗的循证临床指南。
J Pain Res. 2022 Dec 6;15:3729-3832. doi: 10.2147/JPR.S386879. eCollection 2022.
8
Therapeutic Efficacy of Third-Generation Percutaneous Vertebral Augmentation System (PVAS) in Osteoporotic Vertebral Compression Fractures (OVCFs): A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.第三代经皮椎体后凸成形术系统(PVAS)治疗骨质疏松性椎体压缩性骨折(OVCFs)的疗效:系统评价和荟萃分析。
Biomed Res Int. 2022 May 7;2022:9637831. doi: 10.1155/2022/9637831. eCollection 2022.
9
A Multiscale Finite Element Analysis of Balloon Kyphoplasty to Investigate the Risk of Bone-Cement Separation In Vivo.球囊椎体后凸成形术的多尺度有限元分析以研究体内骨水泥分离的风险
Int J Spine Surg. 2021 Apr;15(2):302-314. doi: 10.14444/8040. Epub 2021 Apr 1.
10
Advances in Vertebral Augmentation Systems for Osteoporotic Vertebral Compression Fractures.骨质疏松性椎体压缩骨折椎体增强系统的研究进展。
Pain Res Manag. 2020 Dec 7;2020:3947368. doi: 10.1155/2020/3947368. eCollection 2020.