High viscosity versus common viscosity bone cement systems in the treatment of osteoporotic vertebral compressive fractures: a Meta-analysis

doi:10.3969/j.issn.2095-4344.2017.02.028

Abstract

Abstract:

BACKGROUND: Vertebroplasty system has been proved to be effective for osteoporotic vertebral compressive fracture (OVCF); however, bone cement leakage-related complications occur frequently. Thereafter, high-viscosity bone cement system with high safety and efficacy is developed, but there is still a lack of large-scale and high quality research.
OBJECTIVE: To systematically review the efficacy and safety of high viscosity versus common bone cement systems for OVCF.
METHODS: PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, CNKI, CqVip and WanFang databases were searched to collect the literatures about randomized controlled trials (RCTs) or clinical controlled trials (CCTs) of high viscosity versus common bone cement systems for OVCF published before January 2016. The quality assessment of included literatures and data extraction were performed by two researchers independently according to the Cochrane system. Data analysis was conducted using RevMan 5. 2 software.
RESULTS AND CONCLUSION: Four RCTs and six CCTs were enrolled. The results of Meta-analysis indicate that there were no significant differences in the volume of bone cement [MD=0.17, 95% CI(-0.04, 0.38)], visual analogue scale scores [RCT: MD=-0.30, 95%CI(-0.72, 0.11); CCT: MD=-0.05, 95%CI(-0.43, 0.32)] and incidence of second fractures [OR=1.77, 95%CI(0.24, 12.86)] between two bone cements. However, patients undergoing high viscosity bone cement system have significantly lower Oswestry disability index scores [MD=-2.99, 95%CI(-5.85, -0.13)], greater recovery of Cobb angle [MD=-3.19, 95%CI(-5.27, -1.10)] and lower incidence of cement leakage [OR=0.35, 95%CI(0.24, 0.51)]. High viscosity bone cement system in the treatment of OVCF shows good results at recovery of spinal structure and function and reducing leakage. Due to the limited quantity of included literature sand high heterogeneity, more large scale and high quality RCTs are still needed for further verification.

中国组织工程研究杂志出版内容重点：生物材料；骨生物材料; 口腔生物材料; 纳米材料; 缓释材料; 材料相容性；组织工程

Key words: Spinal Fractures, Fractures, Compression, Evidence-Based Medicine, Tissue Engineering

CLC Number:

R318

Mu Xiao-ping, Yi Wei-lin, Wei Jian-xun, Ou Yu-fu, Li Zhu-hai.

High viscosity versus common viscosity bone cement systems in the treatment of osteoporotic vertebral compressive fractures: a Meta-analysis

[J]. Chinese Journal of Tissue Engineering Research, 2017, 21(2): 322-328.

Figures/Tables 11

References

[1]Wong CC, Mc Girt MJ. Vertebral compression fractures: a review of current management and multimodal therapy.J Multidiscip Healthc. 2013;6: 205-214.

[2]Old JL, Calvert M. Vertebral compression fractures in the elderly. Am Fam Phys. 2004;69(1):111-116.

[3]Zhai WF, Jia YW, Wang JJ, et al. The clinical effect of percutaneous kyphoplasty for the treatment of multiple osteoporotic vertebral compression fractures and the prevention of new vertebral fractures. Int J Clin Exp Med. 2015;8(8): 13473-13481.

[4]Sakuma M, Endo N, Oinuma T, et al. Incidence of osteoporotic fractures in Sado,Japan in 2010. J Bone Miner Metab. 2014;32:200-205.

[5]Anderson PA, Froyshteter AB, Tontz Jr WL. Meta-analysis of vertebralaugmentation compared with conservative treatment for osteoporotic spinalfractures. J Bone Miner Res. 2013;28:372-382.

[6]Martin DJ, Rad AE, Kallmes DF. Prevalence of extravertebral cement leakage after vertebroplasty: procedural documentation versus CT detection. Acta Radiol. 2012;53:569-572.

[7]Zhang L, Liu ZJ, Wang JC, et al. Unipedicular versus bipedicular percutaneous vertebroplasty for osteoporotic vertebral compression fractures:a prospective randomized study. BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2015;16: 145.

[8]Lador R, Liberman S, Ben-Galim P, et al. A cadaverstudy to compare vertebral augmentation with a high-viscosity cement toaugmentation with conventional lower-viscosity cement. J Spinal Disord Tech.2013;26:68-73.

[9]Furlan AD, Pennick V, Bombardier C, et al.Updatedmethod guidelines for systematic reviews in the Cochrane BackReview Group. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2009;34(18):1929-1941.

[10]Stang A. Critical evaluation of the Newcastle-Ottawa scale for the assessment of the quality of nonrandomized studies in meta-analyses. Eur J Epidemiol. 2010;25(9):603-605.

[11]Rapan S, Jovanovic S, Gulan G, et al. Vertebroplasty – high viscosity cement versus low viscosity cement. Coll. Antropol. 2010;34 (3) :1063-1067.

[12]Georgy BA. Clinical experience with high-viscosity cementsfor percutaneous vertebral body augmentation:occurrence, degree, and location of cementleakage compared with kyphoplasty.AJNR Am J Neuroradiol. 2010;31(3):504-508.

[13]彭昊,谭俊峰,刘洋,等.高黏度骨水泥与传统骨水泥治疗骨质疏松性椎体压缩性骨折的疗效比较[J].生物医学工程与临床, 2014, 18(4):344-348.

[14]陈学忠,董玮,奚江明,等.高黏度与低黏度骨水泥在椎体成形术中应用的临床对比研究[J].成都医学院学报,2015,10(2):186-189.

[15]吴强,包拥政,莫世赞,等.高粘度与低粘度骨水泥椎体成形术治疗OVCFs的疗效观察[J].国际医药卫生导报,2015,21(1):29-31.

[16]周英杰,赵鹏飞,郑怀亮,等.两种骨水泥应用于老年胸腰椎骨折椎体成形术的疗效观察[J].中国矫形外科杂志, 2015,23(4):364-367.

[17]徐超,伊力哈木•托合提,李国华,等.高粘度与低粘度骨水泥PVP治疗骨质疏松椎体压缩骨折的疗效和并发症[J].中国脊柱脊髓志,2014,24(10):900-905.

[18]Zhang L, Wang JC, Feng XM, et al. A comparison of high viscosity bone cement and low viscositybone cement vertebroplasty for severe osteoporotic vertebralcompression fractures.Clin Neurol Neurosurg. 2015;129:10-16.

[19]笪晓伟,李启中,区杰雄,等.高黏度与低黏度骨水泥在经皮椎体后凸成形术中的应用比较[J].中国骨科临床与基础研究杂志, 2015, 7(2):79-83.

[20]熊文华,杨云海,林卓锋,等.高粘度骨水泥在治疗骨质疏松性椎体压缩骨折中的临床应用[J].河北医学,2015,21(5):774-777.

[21]Chen C, Li DH, Wang ZG, et al. Safety and Efficacy Studies of Vertebroplasty, Kyphoplasty, and Mesh-Container-Plasty for the Treatment of Vertebral Compression Fractures: Preliminary Report. PLoS ONE. 2016; 11(3): e0151492.

[22]Ee GWW, Lei J, Guo CM, et al. Comparison of clinical outcomes and radiographic measurements in four different treatment modalities for osteoporotic compression fractures: retrospective analysis. J Spinal Disord Tech. 2015;28(6):E328-335.

[23]Yang YM, Ren ZW, Ma W, et al. Current status of percutaneous vertebroplasty and percutaneous kyphoplasty-a review. Med Sci Monit. 2013;19: 826-836.

[24]Habib M, Serhan H, Marchek C, et al. Cement leakage andfilling pattern study of low viscous vertebroplastic versus highviscous confidence cement. SAS J. 2010;4(1):26-33.

[25]李春海,刘尚礼,叶伟,等.高黏度骨水泥在经皮椎体成形术中的应用[J].中华骨科杂志,2007,27(4):259-262.

[26]申勇,任虎,张英泽,等.经皮椎体后凸成形术治疗骨质疏松性椎体压缩骨折骨水泥渗漏的相关因素分析[J].中国修复重建外科杂志, 2010,24(1): 27-31.

[27]Wang CH,Ma JZ,Zhang CC,et al. Comparison of high -viscosity cement vertebroplasty and balloon kyphoplasty for the treatment of osteoporotic vertebral compression fractures. Pain Physician. 2015;18(2):E187-194.

[28]王峙锦,王宏,马凯,等.高粘度骨水泥PVP 或PKP 结合体位复位治疗胸腰椎骨质疏松性椎体压缩骨折的疗效观察[J].中国骨关节损伤杂志,2016,31(6):1-2.