Advertisement

Osteoporosis International

, Volume 30, Issue 2, pp 423–430 | Cite as

Risk factors and score for recollapse of the augmented vertebrae after percutaneous vertebroplasty in osteoporotic vertebral compression fractures

  • W B. Yu
  • X B. Jiang
  • D. Liang
  • W X. Xu
  • L Q. Ye
  • J. WangEmail author
Original Article

Abstract

Summary

Our study demonstrated a high incidence of recollapse of the augmented vertebrae after PVP treatment for OVCFs. A risk score based on all significant factors can predict the rate of recollapse and gain clinical benefits to prevent recollapse in patients at high risk.

Background

Recollapse of the augmented vertebrae after percutaneous vertebroplasty (PVP) treatment for osteoporotic vertebral compression fractures (OVCFs) has obtained much attention. However, little is known about risk factors and score for recollapse of the augmented vertebrae.

Objective

To determine risk factors and furthermore develop a risk score related to recollapse of the augmented vertebrae after PVP treatment for OVCFs.

Methods

Patients who were treated with PVP for single OVCFs and met this study’s inclusion criteria were retrospectively reviewed. The follow-up period was at least 2 years. Associations of recollapse with co-variates (age, gender, bone mass density [BMD] with a T-score, fracture level, intravertebral cleft [IVC], fracture type, cement volume, cement leakage, leakage into a disc, cement distribution pattern, Non-PMMA-endplate-contact [NPEC], preoperative fracture severity, reduction rate [RR], reduction angle [RA]) were analyzed and a risk score for recollapse was further developed to predict recollapse.

Results

A total of 152 patients were included. Recollapse group was found in 42 (27.6%) patients. Preoperative IVC, solid lump cement distribution pattern, more RR (a cutoff value of 7%) and larger RA (a cutoff value of 3°) was significantly associated with increased risk for recollapse of the augmented vertebrae. A risk score was developed based on the number of risk factors present in each patient. Patients with a score of 4 had an approximately ninefold increased risk of developing recollapse over patients with a score of 0. The receiver operating characteristic curve of the risk score generated an area under the curve of 0.899 (95% CI 0.642–0.836, P = 0.000).

Conclusion

A risk score based on preoperative IVC, cement distribution pattern, reduction rate, and reduction angle predicts the rate of recollapse. Additional studies should aim to validate this score and inspect clinical benefits of recollapse prophylaxis in patients at high risk.

Keywords

Augmented vertebrae Osteoporotic vertebral compression fracture Percutaneous vertebroplasty Recollapse Risk score 

Notes

Funding information

The authors gratefully acknowledge the support from the National Natural Science Foundation of China (81804113).

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflicts of interest

None.

Statement of informed consent

For this type of study formal consent is not required.

Reference

  1. 1.
    Johnell O, Kanis JA (2006) An estimate of the worldwide prevalence and disability associated with osteoporotic fractures. Osteoporos Int 17:1726–1733CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Borgstrom F, Sobocki P, Strom O et al (2007) The societal burden of osteoporosis in Sweden. Bone 40:1602–1609CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Garfin SR, Yuan HA, Reiley M (2001) A new technologies in spine: kyphoplasty and vertebroplasty for the treatment of painful osteoporotic compression fractures. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 26:1511–1515CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Zethraeus N, Borgstrom F, Strom O et al (2007) Cost-effectiveness of the treatment and prevention of osteoporosis--a review of the literature and a reference model. Osteoporos Int 18:9–23CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    McConnell CT Jr, Wippold FJ, Ray CE Jr et al (2014) ACR appropriateness criteria management of vertebral compression fractures. J Am Coll Radiol 11:757–763CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Kim DH, Vaccaro AR (2006) Osteoporotic compression fractures of the spine; current options and considerations for treatment. Spine J 6:479–487CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Melton LJ, Kan SH, Frye MA et al (1989) Epidemiology of vertebral fractures in women. Am J Epidemiol 129:1000–1011CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Suzuki N, Ogikubo O, Hansson T (2008) The course of the acute vertebral body fragility fracture: its effect on pain, disability and quality of life during 12 months. Eur Spine J 17:1380–1390CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Barr JD, Barr MS, Lemley TJ, McCann RM (2000) Percutaneous vertebroplasty for pain relief and spinal stabilization. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 25:923–928CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Jang JS, Kim DY, Lee SH (2003) Efficacy of percutaneous vertebroplasty in the treatment of intravertebral pseudarthrosis associated with noninfected avascular necrosis of the vertebral body. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 28:1588–1592Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Masala S, Mastrangeli R, Petrella MC, Massari F, Ursone A, Simonetti G (2009) Percutaneous vertebroplasty in 1,253 levels: results and long-term effectiveness in a single centre. Eur Radiol 19:165–171CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Kang SK, Lee CW, Park NK, Kang TW, Lim JW, Cha KY, Kim JH (2011) Predictive risk factors for refracture after percutaneous vertebroplasty. Ann Rehabil Med 35:844–851CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Heo DH, Chin DK, Yoon YS, Kuh SU (2009) Recollapse of previous vertebral compression fracture after percutaneous vertebroplasty. Osteoporos Int 20:473–480CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Lin WC, Lee YC, Lee CH, Kuo YL, Cheng YF, Lui CC, Cheng TT (2008) Refractures in cemented vertebrae after percutaneous vertebroplasty: a retrospective analysis. Eur Spine J 17:592–599CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Lin WC, Lu CH, Chen HL, Wang HC, Yu CY, Wu RW, Cheng YF, Lui CC (2010) The impact of preoperative magnetic resonance images on outcome of cemented vertebrae. Eur Spine J 19:1899–1906CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Jensen ME, Evans AJ, Mathis JM et al (1997) Percutaneous polymethylmethacrylate vertebroplasty in the treatment of osteoporotic vertebral body compression fractures: technical aspects. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 18:1897–1904Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Yu W, Liang, Yao Z et al (2017) Risk factors for recollapse of the augmented vertebrae after percutaneous vertebroplasty for osteoporotic vertebral fractures with intravertebral vacuum cleft. Medicine 96:e5675CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Libicher M, Appelt A, Berger I, Baier M, Meeder PJ, Grafe I, DaFonseca K, Nöldge G, Kasperk C (2007) The intravertebral vacuum phenomen as specific sign of osteonecrosis in vertebral compression fractures: results from a radiological and histological study. Eur Radiol 17:2248–2252CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Linn J, Birkenmaier C, Hoffmann RT, Reiser M, Baur-Melnyk A (2009) The intravertebral cleft in acute osteoporotic fractures: fluid in magnetic resonance imaging-vacuum in computed tomography? Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 34:E88–E93CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Kim MJ, Lindsey DP, Hannibal M et al (2006) Vertebroplasty versus kyphoplasty: biomechanical behavior under repetitive loading conditions. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 31:2079–2084CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Kim YY, Rhyu KW (2010) Recompression of vertebral body after balloon kyphoplasty for osteoporotic vertebral compression fracture. Eur Spine J 19:1907–1912CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Buchbinder R, Osborne RH, Ebeling PR, Wark JD, Mitchell P, Wriedt C, Graves S, Staples MP, Murphy B (2009) A randomized trial of vertebroplasty for painful osteoporotic vertebral fractures. N Engl J Med 361:557–568CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Kallmes DF, Comstock BA, Heagerty PJ, Turner JA, Wilson DJ, Diamond TH, Edwards R, Gray LA, Stout L, Owen S, Hollingworth W, Ghdoke B, Annesley-Williams DJ, Ralston SH, Jarvik JG (2009) A randomized trial of vertebroplasty for osteoporotic spinal fractures. N Engl J Med 361:569–579CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    McGuire R (2011) AAOS clinical practice guideline: the treatment of symptomatic osteoporotic spinal compression fractures. J Am Acad Orthop Surg 19:183–184CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Brodano GB, Amendola L, Martikos K, Bettuzzi C, Boriani L, Gasbarrini A, Bandiera S, Terzi S, Greggi T, Boriani S (2011) Vertebroplasty: benefits are more than risks in selected and evidence-based informed patients. A retrospective study of 59 cases. Eur Spine J 20:1265–1271CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Gerling MC, Eubanks JD, Patel R, Whang PG, Bohlman HH, Ahn NU (2011) Cement augmentation of refractory osteoporotic vertebral compression fractures: survivorship analysis. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 36:E1266–E1269CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Kotwica Z, Saracen A (2011) Early and long-term outcomes of vertebroplasty for single osteoporotic fractures. Neurol Neurochir Pol 45:431–435CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Kung-Chia Li WMW, Tak-Uee Wong WMW, Fu-Chi Kung WMW et al (2004) STAGING of Kümmell’s disease. J Musculoskelet Res 8:43–55CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Yu W, Jiang X, Liang et al (2017) Intravertebral vacuum cleft and its varied locations within osteoporotic vertebral compression fractures: effect on therapeutic efficacy. Pain Physician 20:E979–E986Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Chen YJ, Chen WH, Chen HT, Hsu HC (2012) Repeat needle insertion in vertebroplasty to prevent re-collapse of the treated vertebrae. Eur J Radiol 81:558–561CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Niu J, Zhou H, Meng Q, Shi J, Meng B, Yang H (2015) Factors affecting recompression of augmented vertebrae after successful percutaneous balloon kyphoplasty: a retrospective analysis. Acta Radiol 56:1380–1387CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Chen LH, Hsieh MK, Liao JC, Lai PL, Niu CC, Fu TS, Tsai TT, Chen WJ (2011) Repeated percutaneous vertebroplasty for refracture of cemented vertebrae. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg 131:927–933CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Yu WB, Liang D, Jiang XB, Yao ZS, Qiu T, Ye LQ (2017) Efficacy and safety of the target puncture technique for treatment of osteoporotic vertebral compression fractures with intravertebral clefts. J Neurointerv Surg 9:1113–1117CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    McKiernan F, Faciszewski T, Jensen R (2003) Reporting height restoration in vertebral compression fractures. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 28:2517–2521CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© International Osteoporosis Foundation and National Osteoporosis Foundation 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • W B. Yu
    • 1
  • X B. Jiang
    • 2
  • D. Liang
    • 2
  • W X. Xu
    • 3
  • L Q. Ye
    • 2
  • J. Wang
    • 3
    Email author
  1. 1.Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, The First Affiliated Hospital of Guangxi University of Chinese MedicineNanningPeople’s Republic of China
  2. 2.The First Affiliated Hospital of Guangzhou University of Chinese MedicineGuangzhouPeople’s Republic of China
  3. 3.Department of Spinal SurgeryTongde Hospital of Zhejiang ProvinceHangzhouPeople’s Republic of China

Personalised recommendations