Is vertebral body stenting in combination with CaP cement superior to kyphoplasty?
In the evolution of the minimally invasive treatment of vertebral compression fractures, vertebral body stenting (VBS) was developed to reduce intraoperative and secondary loss of vertebral height. Particularly in combination with the usage of biodegradable cement, the influence of VBS on the rate of intraoperative complications and long-term outcome is unclear. The purpose of this study was to investigate the differences between balloon kyphoplasty (BKP) and VBS regarding their long-term clinical and radiological outcome in combination with calcium phosphate (CaP) application instead of polymethyl methacrylate (PMMA).
This retrospective study included 49 patients with fresh mono-segmental thoracolumbar fractures without neurological signs treated with VBS or BKP and CaP cement (Calcibone). The outcome was evaluated with the visual analogue pain scale (VAS), the Oswestry disability score (ODI), and radiologically assessed.
In the course of the radiological follow-up, the VBS group showed statistically significant less vertebral height loss than the BKP group. However, with respect to VAS and ODI scores there were no statistically significant differences between the VBS and BKP group in the clinical follow-up. The rate of cement leakage was comparable in both groups.
Both techniques facilitated good clinical results in combination with absorbable cement augmentation. In particular, the VBS enabled us to benefit from the advantages of the resorbable isothermic CaP cement with an improved radiological outcome in the long term compared to BKP. However, there was a mentionable loss of reduction in the follow-up in both groups compared to previously published data with PMMA cement.
KeywordsVertebral fracture Kyphoplasty Vertebral body stenting Absorbable cement Calcium phosphate
Compliance with ethical standards
Conflict of interest
All authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
- 1.Ma X-L, Xing D, Ma J-X et al (2012) Balloon kyphoplasty versus percutaneous vertebroplasty in treating osteoporotic vertebral compression fracture: grading the evidence through a systematic review and meta-analysis. Eur Spine J 21:1844–1859. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00586-012-2441-6 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
- 3.Lovi A, Teli M, Ortolina A et al (2009) Vertebroplasty and kyphoplasty: complementary techniques for the treatment of painful osteoporotic vertebral compression fractures. A prospective non-randomised study on 154 patients. Eur Spine J 18(Suppl 1):95–101. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00586-009-0986-9 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
- 9.Ryu K-S, Shim J-H, Heo H-Y, Park C-K (2010) Therapeutic efficacy of injectable calcium phosphate cement in osteoporotic vertebral compression fractures: prospective nonrandomized controlled study at 6-month follow-up. World Neurosurg 73:408–411. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wneu.2010.01.006 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 15.Matejka J, Zeman J, Belatka J et al (2011) Vertebral body augmentation using a vertebral body stent. Acta Chir Orthop Traumatol Cechoslov 78:442–446Google Scholar
- 26.R Core Team (2013) R: A language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria. http://www.R-project.org/
- 30.Blattert TR, Jestaedt L, Weckbach A (2009) Suitability of a calcium phosphate cement in osteoporotic vertebral body fracture augmentation: a controlled, randomized, clinical trial of balloon kyphoplasty comparing calcium phosphate versus polymethylmethacrylate. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 34:108–114CrossRefGoogle Scholar