Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26020950›Full record

SynthesisPloS one2015

Surgical versus non-surgical treatment for vertebral compression fracture with osteopenia: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Jia-Bao Guo, Yi Zhu, Bing-Lin Chen, Bin Xie, Wen-Yi Zhang, Yu-Jie Yang, Yu-Shan Yue, Xue-Qiang Wang

Open access · goldAbstract readComparative StudyMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in PloS one, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 21 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
21citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
5.6field-weighted citation impact, top 4% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

21 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 42 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Single balloon versus double balloon bipedicular kyphoplasty: a systematic review and meta-analysis.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 · 2018
    Pooled it
  3. Preoperative hounsfield unit measurements predict non-infectious complications following posterior spinal instrumentation for traumatic thoracolumbar fractures.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 · 2026
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Percutaneous vertebral augmentation in fragility fractures-indications and limitations.European journal of trauma and emergency surgery : official publication of the European Trauma Society · 2017
    Review
  18. Conservative management of osteoporotic vertebral fractures: an update.European journal of trauma and emergency surgery : official publication of the European Trauma Society · 2017
    Review
  19. Prevention and rehabilitation of osteoporosis.Wiener medizinische Wochenschrift (1946) · 2016
    Review
  20. What's new in vertebral cementoplasty?The British journal of radiology · 2016
    Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Jia-Bao GuoSecond School of Clinical Medical, Nanjing University of Chinese Medicine, Nanjing, Jiangsu, China.
Yi ZhuSecond School of Clinical Medical, Nanjing University of Chinese Medicine, Nanjing, Jiangsu, China.
Bing-Lin ChenDepartment of sport Rehabilitation, Shanghai University of Sport, Shanghai, China.
Bin XieSecond School of Clinical Medical, Nanjing University of Chinese Medicine, Nanjing, Jiangsu, China.
Wen-Yi ZhangSecond School of Clinical Medical, Nanjing University of Chinese Medicine, Nanjing, Jiangsu, China.
Yu-Jie YangSecond School of Clinical Medical, Nanjing University of Chinese Medicine, Nanjing, Jiangsu, China.
Yu-Shan YueSecond School of Clinical Medical, Nanjing University of Chinese Medicine, Nanjing, Jiangsu, China.
Xue-Qiang WangDepartment of sport Rehabilitation, Shanghai University of Sport, Shanghai, China.
Nanjing University of Chinese Medicine · CNShanghai University of Sport · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundSurgical and non-surgical interventions are the two categories for treatment of vertebral compression fractures (VCFs). However, there is clinical uncertainty over optimal management. This study aimed to examine the safety and effectiveness of surgical management for treatment of VCFs with osteopenia compared with non-surgical treatment.

methodsWe conducted a systematic search through electronic databases from inception to June 2014, with no limits on study data or language. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating surgical versus non-surgical interventions for treatment of patients with VCFs due to osteopenia were considered. Primary outcomes were pain and adverse effects. A random-effects model was used to calculate the pooled mean difference (MD) or risk ratios with 95% confidence interval (CI).

resultsSixteen reports (11 studies) met the inclusion criteria, and provided data for the meta-analysis with a total of 1,401 participants. Compared with conservative treatment, surgical treatment was more effective in reducing pain (short-term: MD -2.05, 95% CI -3.55 to -0.56, P=0.007; mid-term: MD -1.70, 95% CI -2.78 to -0.62, P=0.002; long-term: MD -1.24, 95% CI -2.20 to -0.29, P=0.01) and disability on the Roland-Morris Disability score (short-term: MD -4.97, 95% CI -8.71 to -1.23, P=0.009), as well as improving quality of life on the Short-Form 36 Physical Component Summary score (short-term: MD 5.53, 95% CI 1.45 to 9.61, P=0.008) and the Quality of Life Questionnaire of the European Foundation for Osteoporosis score (short-term: MD -5.01, 95% CI -8.11 to -1.91, P=0.002). Indirect comparisons between vertebroplasty and kyphoplasty found no evidence that the treatment effect differed across the two interventions for any outcomes assessed. Compared with the sham procedure, surgical treatment showed no evidence of improvement in pain relief and physical function. Based on these two comparisons, no significant difference between groups was noted in the pooled results for adverse events.

conclusionCompared to conservative treatment, surgical treatment was more effective in decreasing pain in the short,mid and long terms. However, no significant mid- and long-term differences in physical function and quality of life was observed. Little good evidence is available for surgical treatment compared with that for sham procedure. PV and BK are currently used to treat VCFs with osteopenia, with little difference in treatment effects. Evidence of better quality and from a larger sample size is required before a recommendation can be made. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: http://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO PROSPERO registration number: CRD42013005142.

Indexed as

Bone Diseases, MetabolicFemaleFractures, CompressionHumansMaleQuality of LifeRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicSpinal Fractures

Identifiers

PMID26020950
PMCPMC4447413
OpenAlexW394505033

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.