Chang Wenli, Zhang Xinyan, Jiao Ning, Yuwen Peizhi, Zhu Yanbin, Zhang Fei, Chen Wei
Department of Orthopaedic Surgery Department of Radiology Department of Pharmacy, the Third Hospital of Hebei Medical University, Shijiazhuang, P.R. China.
Medicine (Baltimore). 2017 Apr;96(17):e6738. doi: 10.1097/MD.0000000000006738.
The debate on the efficacy of unilateral percutaneous kyphoplasty (UPKP) and bilateral percutaneous kyphoplasty (BPKP) for the treatment of osteoporotic vertebral compression fractures (OVCFs) is ongoing.This meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the clinical results of UPKP and BPKP in the treatment of OVCFs.
Web of Science, PubMed, Embase, and the Chinese Biomedical Database publication databases were searched using a date range of January 2008 to November 2016, for studies comparing UPKP and BPKP for the treatment of OVCFs. The clinical effectiveness was assessed by comparing perioperative outcomes (surgery time, the volume of injected cement, X-ray exposure time, and kyphotic angle reduction), clinical outcomes (visual analogue scale [VAS] for pain relief and Oswestry Disability Index [ODI] for quality of life), and surgery-related complications (cement leakage and adjacent vertebral fractures). Data were analyzed using Stata/SE11.0 software.
Fourteen trials with 1194 patients were retrieved. The pooled results showed significant differences in surgery time (weighted mean difference [WMD] -21.44, 95% confidence interval [CI] [-23.57 to -19.30]; P < .001); volume of injected cement [WMD -1.90, 95% CI [-2.26 to -1.54); P < .001); and X-ray exposure time (WMD -13.66, 95%CI [-19.59 to -7.72]; P < .001) between UPKP and BPKP treatments. However, the pooled results showed no significant differences in kyphotic angle reduction, VAS in the short-term, VAS in the long-term, ODI, cement leakage, or adjacent vertebral fractures between the 2 surgical procedures. Following a subgroup analysis, the results based on randomized controlled trials (RCTs) indicated that there were significant differences in surgery time (WMD -24.65, 95%CI [-26.53 to -22.77]; P < .001) and the volume of injected cement (WMD -1.66, 95%CI [-1.97 to -1.36]; P < .001) between UPKP and BPKP treatment procedures, respectively. The results based on RCTs indicated that there were no significant differences, either in kyphotic angle reduction or in X-ray exposure time, between the 2 surgical procedures.
Compared to BPKP procedures, UPKP procedures may achieve similar clinical results in the treatment of OVCFs when assessed in terms of the pain relief, improvements in life quality, and surgery-related complications. However, UPKP procedures had a shorter operation time and volume of injected cement compared with BPKP procedures. Additional high quality and multicenter RCTs are needed to provide further robust evidence.
关于单侧经皮椎体后凸成形术(UPKP)和双侧经皮椎体后凸成形术(BPKP)治疗骨质疏松性椎体压缩骨折(OVCFs)的疗效争论仍在继续。本荟萃分析旨在评估UPKP和BPKP治疗OVCFs的临床结果。
检索了Web of Science、PubMed、Embase和中国生物医学数据库等出版物数据库,检索时间范围为2008年1月至2016年11月,以查找比较UPKP和BPKP治疗OVCFs的研究。通过比较围手术期结果(手术时间、骨水泥注入量、X线暴露时间和后凸角减小)、临床结果(疼痛缓解的视觉模拟评分[VAS]和生活质量的Oswestry功能障碍指数[ODI])以及手术相关并发症(骨水泥渗漏和相邻椎体骨折)来评估临床疗效。使用Stata/SE11.0软件进行数据分析。
共检索到14项试验,涉及1194例患者。汇总结果显示,UPKP和BPKP治疗在手术时间(加权平均差[WMD] -21.44,95%置信区间[CI][-23.57至-19.30];P<.001)、骨水泥注入量[WMD -1.90,95%CI[-2.26至-1.54];P<.001]和X线暴露时间(WMD -13.66,95%CI[-19.59至-7.72];P<.001)方面存在显著差异。然而,汇总结果显示,两种手术方法在减小后凸角、短期VAS、长期VAS、ODI、骨水泥渗漏或相邻椎体骨折方面无显著差异。亚组分析结果显示,基于随机对照试验(RCT)的结果表明,UPKP和BPKP治疗程序在手术时间(WMD -24.65,95%CI[-26.53至-22.77];P<.001)和骨水泥注入量(WMD -1.66,95%CI[-1.97至-1.36];P<.001)方面分别存在显著差异。基于RCT的结果表明,两种手术方法在减小后凸角或X线暴露时间方面均无显著差异。
与BPKP手术相比,在疼痛缓解、生活质量改善和手术相关并发症方面评估时,UPKP手术在治疗OVCFs方面可能取得相似的临床结果。然而,与BPKP手术相比,UPKP手术的手术时间更短,骨水泥注入量更少。需要更多高质量的多中心RCT来提供更有力的证据。