Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31830969›Full record

ArticleBMC surgery2019

Unilateral curved versus bipedicular vertebroplasty in the treatment of osteoporotic vertebral compression fractures.

Rui Zhong, Jianheng Liu, Runsheng Wang, Yihao Liu, Binbin Chen, Wei Jiang, Keya Mao, Peifu Tang

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC surgery, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
16citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
1.8field-weighted citation impact, top 15% 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

16 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 31 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Trial
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Comparison of the efficacy and safety of vertebroplasty with different pedicle approaches for osteoporotic vertebral.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 · 2024
    Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
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 1 institution in 1 country.

Rui ZhongDepartment of Orthopaedics, Chinese PLA General Hospital, Beijing, 100853, China.
Jianheng LiuDepartment of Orthopaedics, Chinese PLA General Hospital, Beijing, 100853, China.
Runsheng WangDepartment of Orthopaedics, Chinese PLA General Hospital, Beijing, 100853, China.
Yihao LiuDepartment of Orthopaedics, Chinese PLA General Hospital, Beijing, 100853, China.
Binbin ChenDepartment of Orthopaedics, Chinese PLA General Hospital, Beijing, 100853, China.
Wei JiangDepartment of Orthopaedics, Chinese PLA General Hospital, Beijing, 100853, China.
Keya MaoDepartment of Orthopaedics, Chinese PLA General Hospital, Beijing, 100853, China. jianhengliu@126.com.
Peifu TangDepartment of Orthopaedics, Chinese PLA General Hospital, Beijing, 100853, China. pftang301@163.com.
Chinese PLA General Hospital · CN

Funding

Clinical Research Support Fund of PLA General Hospital 2017FC-TSYS-2006Military medical science and technology youth training program 19QNP052Project of the National Natural Science Foundation 51372276Project of the National Natural Science Foundation 81702121Scientific Research Project of Capital Health Development 2018-4-5014
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundVertebral compression fracture is one of the most common complications of osteoporosis. In this study an unilateral curved vertebroplasty device was developed, and the safety, effectiveness, and surgical parameters of curved vertebroplasty (CVP) in the treatment of painful osteoporotic vertebral compression fractures was investigated and compared with traditional bipedicular vertebroplasty (BVP).

methodsWe investigated 104 vertebral augmentation procedures performed over 36 months. CVP and BVP procedures were compared for baseline clinical variables, pain relief (Visual Analog Scale, VAS), disability improvement (Oswestry Disability Index, ODI), operation time, number of fluoroscopic images, volume of cement per level, and cement leakage rate for each level treated. Complications and refracture incidence were also recorded in the two groups.

resultsThe VAS and ODI in both group had no significant difference preoperative (P > 0.05), and a significant postoperative improvement in the VAS scores and ODI was found in both group (P < 0.001). However, the CVP group had significantly lower operation time, number of fluoroscopic images, and cement leakage rate per level than the BVP group (P < 0.05); however, the volumes of cement per level were similar in the two groups (P > 0.05). Neither group had any serious complications. Five and two patients in the BVP group developed refractures at non-adjacent and adjacent levels, respectively, with one patient developing refractures twice; however, none of the patients in the CVP group developed refractures at any level.

conclusionsOur findings revealed that both CVP and BVP were safe and effective treatments for osteoporotic vertebral compression fractures, and CVP entails a shorter operation time, less exposure to fluoroscopy, and lower rate of cement leakage.

Indexed as

AgedBone CementsFemaleFluoroscopyFractures, CompressionHumansMaleMiddle AgedOperative TimeOsteoporotic FracturesPain MeasurementSpinal FracturesTreatment OutcomeVertebroplastyVisual Analog ScaleBone CementsBipedicularCement leakageCurved approachOsteoporotic vertebral compression fracturesVertebroplastyX-ray exposure

Identifiers

PMID31830969
PMCPMC6909451
OpenAlexW2995779547

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.