ArticleJournal of orthopaedic surgery and research2020
How the clinical dosage of bone cement biomechanically affects adjacent vertebrae.
Article in Journal of orthopaedic surgery and research, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 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
10 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 17 citations in OpenAlex.
- Risk factors for adjacent vertebral fracture after kyphoplasty or percutaneous vertebroplasty in osteoporotic vertebral systematic review and meta-analysis compression 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 · 2025Pooled it
- Intrabody Cage Augmentation in Kümmell Disease and Osteoporotic Burst Fractures: Technical Insights and Narrative Review of Current Evidence.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Review
- Biomechanical Effects of Cement Augmentation and Prophylactic Vertebroplasty on Adjacent Segment Stability in Multilevel Spinal Fusion: A Finite Element Analysis.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- The temporal and spatial relationship between percutaneous vertebral augmentation and new symptomatic fracturesDiagnostic and interventional radiology (Ankara, Turkey) · 2024Article
- Bone Cements Used in Vertebral Augmentation: A State-of-the-art Narrative Review.Journal of pain research · 2024Review
- A nomogram prediction model for refracture in elderly patients with osteoporotic vertebral compression fractures after percutaneous vertebroplasty.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 · 2023Article
- Risk assessment for sandwich vertebral fractures in the treatment of osteoporosis vertebral compression fractures using two methods of bone cement reinforcement.Journal of orthopaedic surgery and research · 2023Article
- The vertebral Hounsfield units can quantitatively predict the risk of adjacent vertebral fractures after percutaneous kyphoplasty.Quantitative imaging in medicine and surgery · 2023Article
- Different Modification Methods of Poly Methyl Methacrylate (PMMA) Bone Cement for Orthopedic Surgery Applications.The archives of bone and joint surgery · 2023Review
- Clinical Outcomes of Fracture Haemorrhage Aspiration for Percutaneous Vertebroplasty in Treating Osteoporotic Vertebral Compression Fractures.Journal of pain research · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveThis study evaluated the biomechanical changes in the adjacent vertebrae under a physiological load (500 N) when the clinically relevant amount of bone cement was injected into fractured cadaver vertebral bodies.
methodsThe embalmed cadaver thoracolumbar specimens in which each vertebral body (T12-L2) had a BMD of < 0.75 g/cm
resultsThe average amount of bone cement was 4.4 ml (3.8-5.0 ml). The stiffness of after augmentation was significantly higher than the stiffness of post-fracture (p < 0.05), but still lower than pre-fracture stiffness (p < 0.05). After augmentation, the adjacent upper vertebral strain showed no significant difference (p > 0.05) with pre-fracture, while the strain of adjacent lower vertebral body was significantly higher than that before fracture (p < 0.05). In flexion, T12/L1 intervertebral disc strain was significantly greater after augmentation than after the fracture (p < 0.05), but there was no significant difference from that before the fracture (p > 0.05); L1/2 vertebral strain after augmentation was significantly less than that after the fracture (p < 0.05), but there was no significant difference from that before the fracture (p > 0.05).
conclusionsPVP may therefore have partially reversed the abnormal strain state of adjacent vertebral bodies which was caused by fracture.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.