ArticleDer Unfallchirurg2006
[CT-based analysis of cement distribution in unipedicular vertebroplasty].
Article in Der Unfallchirurg, 2006. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Management of pulmonary cement embolism after percutaneous vertebroplasty and kyphoplasty: a systematic review of the literature.European spine journal : official publication of the European Spine Society, the European Spinal Deformity Society, and the European Section of the Cervical Spine Research Society · 2009Pooled it
- Asymptomatic bone cement pulmonary embolism after vertebroplasty: case report and literature review.Case reports in surgery · 2013Article
- Comparison of unipedicular and bipedicular kyphoplasty on the stiffness and biomechanical balance of compression fractured vertebrae.European spine journal : official publication of the European Spine Society, the European Spinal Deformity Society, and the European Section of the Cervical Spine Research Society · 2011Article
- Results, experience and technical points learnt with use of the SKy Bone Expander kyphoplasty system for osteoporotic vertebral compression fractures: a prospective study of 40 patients with a minimum of 12 months of follow-up.European spine journal : official publication of the European Spine Society, the European Spinal Deformity Society, and the European Section of the Cervical Spine Research Society · 2007Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundVertebroplasty and kyphoplasty are being increasingly used in the treatment of osteoporotic vertebral body fractures. Shortening the duration of operative time and radiation exposure as well as reduction of cannulation-related risks and costs are advantages of the unipedicular technique in contrast to less homogeneous cement distribution as a possible disadvantage. Biomechanical investigations have shown similar results with respect to strength and stiffness both for uni- and bipedicular vertebroplasty. Studies evaluating cement distribution with CT scans using a unipedicular approach have not been published yet. MATERIAL AND
methodsWe present a prospective study on 92 vertebral body fractures (Th8-L5) in 60 patients, aged 76.8 (60-95) years, which were treated by unipedicular vertebroplasty using a para-/transpedicular approach. We evaluated needle position, injected cement volume, and cement deposition based on CT scans. The vertebral body was divided into nine segments in a frontal plane view. The needle was placed in the middle third in 85.9% (79/92), in the right in 11.9% (11/92), and in the left third in 2.2% (2/92). Complications associated with cannulation were not observed. The injectable cement volume was 4.5 (1.5-9.0) ml.
resultsWith respect to superior, middle, and inferior parts, filling of the middle third was achieved in 94.9%, of the right third in 76.1%, and of the left third in 80.4%. Only the right- and left-sided inferior segments showed a filling rate below 75%. Positioning the needle into the right or left third resulted in comparably high filling rates of the middle third (100/83.3%) but only 50.0/54.5% of the contralateral third of the vertebral body.
conclusionUnipedicular vertebroplasty using a modified approach permits a reliable placement of the needle into the middle third of the vertebral body, which is the optimal position regarding cement distribution. Unipedicular vertebroplasty allows homogeneous filling and augmentation of vertebral bodies without need for a second cannulation.
Indexed as
Identifiers
17066292What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.