Vanni Daniele, Galzio Renato, Kazakova Anna, Pantalone Andrea, Grillea Giovanni, Bartolo Marcello, Salini Vincenzo, Magliani Vincenzo
Orthopaedic and Traumatology Department, "G. D'Annunzio" University, Chieti, Italy ;
Neurosurgery Department, "L'Aquila" University, L'Aquila, Italy ;
J Spine Surg. 2016 Mar;2(1):13-20. doi: 10.21037/jss.2016.02.01.
Currently, there is no general consensus about the management of osteoporotic vertebral fractures (OVF). In the past, conservative treatment for at least one month was deemed appropriate for the majority of vertebral fractures. When pain persisted after conservative treatment, it was necessary to consider surgical interventions including: vertebroplasty for vertebral fractures with less than 30% loss of height of the affected vertebral body and kyphoplasty for vertebral fractures with greater than 30% loss of height. Currently, this type of treatment is not feasible. Herein we review the characteristics and methods of operation of three of the most common percutaneous vertebral augmentation systems (PVAS) for the treatment of OVF: Vertebral Body Stenting(®) (VBS), OsseoFix(®) and Spine Jack(®). VBS is a titanium device accompanied by a hydraulic (as opposed to mechanical) working system which allows a partial and not immediate possibility to control the opening of the device. On the other hand, OsseoFix(®) and Spine Jack(®) are accompanied by a mechanical working system which allows a progressive and controlled reduction of the vertebral fracture. Another important aspect to consider is the vertebral body height recovery. OsseoFix(®) has an indirect mechanism of action: the compaction of the trabecular bone causes an increase in the vertebral body height. Unlike the Vertebral Body Stenting(®) and Spine Jack(®), the OsseoFix(®) has no direct lift mechanism. Therefore, for these characteristics and for the force that this device is able to provide. In our opinion, Spine Jack(®) is the only device also suitable for the treatment OVF, traumatic fracture (recent, old or inveterate) and primary or secondary bone tumors.
目前,对于骨质疏松性椎体骨折(OVF)的治疗尚无普遍共识。过去,大多数椎体骨折至少进行一个月的保守治疗被认为是合适的。当保守治疗后疼痛持续时,有必要考虑手术干预,包括:对于椎体高度丢失小于30%的椎体骨折采用椎体成形术,对于椎体高度丢失大于30%的椎体骨折采用后凸成形术。目前,这种治疗方式不可行。在此,我们回顾三种最常见的经皮椎体强化系统(PVAS)治疗OVF的操作特点和方法:椎体支架(Vertebral Body Stenting®)(VBS)、骨固定器(OsseoFix®)和脊柱千斤顶(Spine Jack®)。VBS是一种钛制装置,配有液压(而非机械)工作系统,可部分但非立即控制装置的打开。另一方面,骨固定器(OsseoFix®)和脊柱千斤顶(Spine Jack®)配有机械工作系统,可逐步且可控地复位椎体骨折。另一个需要考虑的重要方面是椎体高度恢复。骨固定器(OsseoFix®)具有间接作用机制:小梁骨的压实导致椎体高度增加。与椎体支架(Vertebral Body Stenting®)和脊柱千斤顶(Spine Jack®)不同,骨固定器(OsseoFix®)没有直接的提升机制。因此,基于这些特点以及该装置能够提供的力量。我们认为,脊柱千斤顶(Spine Jack®)是唯一也适用于治疗OVF、创伤性骨折(近期、陈旧或顽固性)以及原发性或继发性骨肿瘤的装置。