Li Wei-Shang, Cai Yun-Fei, Cong Lin
Department of Orthopedic Surgery, 159407The First Hospital of China Medical University, Shenyang, People's Republic of China.
Department of Dermatology, 159407The First Hospital of China Medical University, Shenyang, People's Republic of China.
Global Spine J. 2022 Apr;12(3):515-525. doi: 10.1177/2192568221999369. Epub 2021 Mar 11.
Meta-analysis.
To systematically compare the effectiveness and safety of vertebral augmentation procedure (VAP) with non-surgical management (NSM) for the treatment of osteoporotic vertebrate compression fractures (OVCFs).
Systematic reviews and meta-analyses with the comparison between VAP and NSM were identified to extract randomized controlled trials from electronic database. Additionally, recently published RCTs were identified. Two researchers independently extracted the data. The primary outcome of this meta-analysis was pain relief evaluated by visual analogue scale (VAS).
Twenty RCTs involving 2566 patients with painful OVCFs were included. Significant differences were found between percutaneous vertebroplasty (PVP) and conservative treatment (CT) in VAS at each time point during follow-up period. The differences of VAS were not significant between PVP and sham procedure at most time points during follow-up period. In subgroup analysis based on fracture type and fracture location, significant differences of VAS were found between PVP and CT and were not found between PVP and sham procedure. In subgroup analysis of duration of back pain, significant differences were found between PVP and CT in VAS at 1 week, 3 month and 1 year. And the differences of VAS were not significant between PVP and CT at 1 month and 6 month.
BKP is considered sufficient to achieve good clinical outcomes. PVP is associated with on beneficial effect on treatment of painful OVCFs compared with sham procedure. The indication and timing of VAP need further research. More independently high-quality RCTs with sufficiently large sample sizes reporting cost-effectiveness are needed.
荟萃分析。
系统比较椎体强化术(VAP)与非手术治疗(NSM)在治疗骨质疏松性椎体压缩骨折(OVCFs)方面的有效性和安全性。
通过系统评价和荟萃分析比较VAP与NSM,并从电子数据库中提取随机对照试验。此外,还检索了近期发表的随机对照试验。两名研究人员独立提取数据。本荟萃分析的主要结局是通过视觉模拟评分法(VAS)评估的疼痛缓解情况。
纳入了20项涉及2566例疼痛性OVCFs患者的随机对照试验。在随访期间的每个时间点,经皮椎体成形术(PVP)与保守治疗(CT)在VAS上存在显著差异。在随访期间的大多数时间点,PVP与假手术在VAS上的差异不显著。在基于骨折类型和骨折部位的亚组分析中,PVP与CT在VAS上存在显著差异,而PVP与假手术之间未发现显著差异。在背痛持续时间的亚组分析中,PVP与CT在1周、3个月和1年时的VAS存在显著差异。而在1个月和6个月时,PVP与CT在VAS上的差异不显著。
骨水泥后凸成形术(BKP)被认为足以取得良好的临床效果。与假手术相比,PVP对疼痛性OVCFs的治疗具有有益效果。VAP的适应证和时机需要进一步研究。需要更多独立的、高质量的、样本量足够大且报告成本效益的随机对照试验。