Chinese Journal of Tissue Engineering Research ›› 2021, Vol. 25 ›› Issue (12): 1930-1935.doi: 10.3969/j.issn.2095-4344.3792

Previous Articles     Next Articles

Meta-analysis of efficacy and safety of bone filling bag vertebroplasty and percutaneous vertebroplasty in the treatment of osteoporotic vertebral compression fracture#br#

Zhong Yuanming1, Wan Tong2, Zhong Xifeng2, Wu Zhuotan2, He Bingkun2, Wu Sixian2   

  1. 1First Affiliated Hospital of Guangxi University of Chinese Medicine, Nanning 530001, Guangxi Zhuang Autonomous Region, China; 2Graduate School of Guangxi University of Chinese Medicine, Nanning 530001, Guangxi Zhuang Autonomous Region, China 
  • Received:2020-04-11 Revised:2020-04-20 Accepted:2020-06-12 Online:2021-04-28 Published:2020-12-26
  • Contact: Zhong Yuanming, First Affiliated Hospital of Guangxi University of Chinese Medicine, Nanning 530001, Guangxi Zhuang Autonomous Region, China
  • About author:Zhong Yuanming, Doctoral supervisor, Professor, Chief physician, First Affiliated Hospital of Guangxi University of Chinese Medicine, Nanning 530001, Guangxi Zhuang Autonomous Region, China
  • Supported by:
    the National Natural Science Foundation of China, No. 81760874 (to ZYM); the First Class Discipline Project of Traditional Chinese Medicine in Guangxi, No. GJKY [2018]12 (to ZYM)

Abstract: OBJECTIVE: It remains disputed whether there is a difference in efficacy and safety between bone filling bag vertebroplasty and percutaneous vertebroplasty in the treatment of osteoporotic vertebral compression fracture. This study systematically analyzed the efficacy and safety of bone filling bag vertebroplasty and percutaneous vertebroplasty in the treatment of osteoporotic vertebral compression fracture.
METHODS: A computer-based online search of CNKI, Wanfang, VIP, EMBASE, PubMed, CBM, and The Cochrane library was performed to retrieve randomized controlled trial studies and cohort studies regarding bone filling bag vertebroplasty and percutaneous vertebroplasty in the treatment of osteoporotic vertebral compression fracture published before March 2020. Moreover, related papers were retrieved manually. After two evaluators independently selected literature, extracted data and evaluated the quality of methodology included in the study, meta-analysis was carried out by using Stata/SE 12.0 software. 
RESULTS: (1) A total of seven articles were included, with 709 patients, of whom 321 were treated with bone filling bag vertebroplasty and 388 with percutaneous vertebroplasty. The quality of the two randomized controlled trials was grade B. The scores of NOS in two cohort studies were 8. The other three cohorts scored 7 on the NOS scale. (2) The meta-analysis results showed that there were significant differences between the two methods in reducing Cobb angle (MD=-1.92, 95%CI:-2.15 to -1.68, P < 0.05) and the leakage rate of bone cement (RR=0.15, 95%CI:0.07-0.30, P < 0.05). There was no significant difference between the two methods in reducing visual analogue scale score (MD=-0.03, 95%CI:-0.12-0.06, P=0.521) and Oswestry disability index (MD=0.16, 95%CI:-0.93-1.26, P=0.770). 
CONCLUSION: Compared with the conventional percutaneous vertebroplasty, bone filling bag vertebroplasty has a significant advantage in improving Cobb angle and reducing the leakage rate of bone cement. The clinical therapeutic effects of the two methods are similar in visual analogue scale score and Oswestry disability index. In view of the limited quality of the included literature, more high-quality multicenter randomized controlled trials are needed to provide evidence support for the above conclusion.


Key words: bone, vertebral body, bone cement, osteoporosis, pain, vertebral fracture, vertebroplasty, meta-analysis

CLC Number: