STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study (level of evidence: 4).PURPOSE: To demonstrate the effects of balloon kyphoplasty (BKP) on prevention of kyphosis progression.OVERVIEW OF LITERATURE: Kyphoplasty can correct local kyphosis (fractured vertebra), but its efficacy is attenuated by adjacent fracture and/or disc height reduction with endplate damage. With these attenuating factors incorporated, a comparison between BKP and conservative treatment is necessary to verify the effect of BKP on kyphosis correction.METHODS: This study retrospectively analyzed 129 patients treated conservatively and 95 treated with BKP in our institution. The rate of new adjacent fracture occurrence was determined using Kaplan–Meier analysis. We examined the progression of local kyphosis in patients who underwent lateral X-ray after 1 year. Local kyphosis was measured as an angle between higher end plate of the vertebra above and lower end plate of the vertebra below the fractured vertebra. The comparison included 45 patients treated conservatively and 58 treated with BKP.RESULTS: The incidence of new adjacent fracture at 1 year was 7.3% in the conservative treatment group and 23.2% in the BKP group (p<0.001), while the progression of local kyphosis at 1 year was 5.7°±4.7° and 3.2°±4.6°, respectively (p=0.01). Relative to conservative treatment, local kyphosis did not progress after BKP, despite the higher incidence of adjacent fracture. Local kyphosis progressed in cases with adjacent fracture compared with those without adjacent fracture (6.0°±4.3° vs. 2.1°±4.3°, p=0.003), and fractured vertebral instability was found to be a risk factor for adjacent fracture in BKP.CONCLUSIONS: Compared with the conservative treatment, BKP suppressed the progression of local kyphosis. However, an adjacent fracture attenuated the BKP correction and was more frequently seen in patients with unstable vertebral fractures.
Cohort Studies ; Humans ; Incidence ; Kyphoplasty ; Kyphosis ; Retrospective Studies ; Risk Factors ; Spine

Methods: Seven patients with spinal cord compression without obvious segmental instability at the C1/2 level treated by C1 laminoplasty were included. The indication of C1 laminoplasty was same as that of C1 laminectomy. C1 laminoplasty was performed in the same way as subaxial double-door laminoplasty. The imaging findings were evaluated using X-ray, computed tomography, and magnetic resonance imaging. The clinical results were evaluated using the Japanese Orthopaedic Association (JOA) Cervical Myelopathy Evaluation Questionnaire (JOACMEQ) and JOA score. Peri- and postoperative complications were also investigated. Results: No patient showed increased C1/2 segmental instability after the surgery. The mean pre- and postoperative JOA scores were 8.6 and 11.7, respectively. The mean recovery rate was 40.2%. The effective rate in the JOACMEQ was 50% for the cervical spine function, 33% for the upper extremity function, 50% for the lower extremity function, 17% for the bladder function, and 17% for the quality of life. No major complication that seemed to be unique to C1 laminoplasty was observed over a period of about 4 years follow-up. Conclusions C1 laminoplasty for patients without obvious segmental instability might be a viable alternative procedure to C1 laminectomy.