Clinical Results of Unilateral Partial Vertebroplasty(UPVP) in Osteoporotic Vertebral Fracture.
10.4184/jkss.2011.18.2.64
- Author:
Jun Young YANG
1
;
June Kyu LEE
;
Soo Min CHA
;
Yong Bum JOO
Author Information
1. Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Research Institute of Medical Science, Chungnam National University School of Medicine, Daejeon, Korea. jyyang@cnu.ac.kr
- Publication Type:Original Article
- Keywords:
Unilateral pedicle;
Osteoporotic Compression Fracture;
Vertebroplasty;
Unilateral Partial Vertebroplasty
- MeSH:
Follow-Up Studies;
Hospitalization;
Prospective Studies;
Vertebroplasty
- From:Journal of Korean Society of Spine Surgery
2011;18(2):64-69
- CountryRepublic of Korea
- Language:Korean
-
Abstract:
STUDY DESIGN: This is a prospective clinical study. OBJECTIVES: We wanted to compare the clinical results of conventional vertebroplasty(VP) and the newly devised unilateral partial vertebroplasty(UPVP). SUMMARY OF LITERATURE REVIEW: There has not been any study on how to reduce the amount of cement used while maintaining the height of the vertebral body and minimizing the adjacent compression fractures. MATERIALS AND METHODS: From 2004 to 2008, Group 1 underwent VP and group 2 underwent UPVP. We compared the difference of the VAS score, the period of hospitalization, the infused amount of cement, the progression of the vertebral body collapse and fresh fracture of the adjacent vertebral body on the follow-up simple radiographs. RESULTS: In group 1, the mean VAS score changed from 6.69 to 2.80, the mean period of hospitalization was 2.30 days and the mean amount of cement infused was 6.50cc. The degree of vertebral body collapse was 0.83, 0.76, 0.69 and 0.63 on follow-up, and 3 cases had fresh fracture. In group 2, the mean VAS score changed from 6.41 to 2.61, the mean period of hospitalization was 2.23 days and the mean amount of cement infused was 3.74cc. The degree of collapse was 0.71, 0.69, 0.68 and 0.63 on follow up and 1 case had fresh fracture. The two groups showed no statistical significance for the change of the VAS score and the period of hospitalization, and the amount of cement was significantly less in group 2. The degree of collapse was not significantly different on the 4 times of follow-up. The frequency of fresh fracture was significantly less in group 2. CONCLUSIONS: UPVP could achieve similar results for pain relief, the period of hospitalization and vertebral body collapse as compared to that of VP, but fresh fracture of the adjacent vertebral body was less. So, UPVP could be a better method than VP.
