SynthesisJournal of orthopaedic surgery and research2020
Analysis of two minimally invasive procedures for osteoporotic vertebral compression fractures with intravertebral cleft: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis 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 13 papers, 4 of them syntheses 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
13 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 18 citations in OpenAlex.
- Risk factors for new vertebral compression fracture following percutaneous vertebral augmentation: a systematic review and meta-analysis based on multivariate logistic regression analysis.Journal of orthopaedic surgery and research · 2025Pooled it
- Risk factors for subsequent vertebral fractures after percutaneous vertebral augmentation in Asian populations: a systematic review and meta-analysis.BMC musculoskeletal disorders · 2025Pooled it
- Vertebral augmentation plus short-segment fixation versus vertebral augmentation alone in Kümmell's disease: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Neurosurgical review · 2022Pooled it
- Therapeutic Efficacy of Third-Generation Percutaneous Vertebral Augmentation System (PVAS) in Osteoporotic Vertebral Compression Fractures (OVCFs): A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.BioMed research international · 2022Pooled it
- Comparison of Clinical and Radiological Outcomes Between Uncemented and Cement Augmented Screws in Short Segment Hybrid Fixation of Unstable Osteoporotic Vertebral Fractures.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Article
- Exploring the MRI-based vertebral bone quality score as a novel predictor of spongy cement distribution in osteoporotic vertebral compression fractures following percutaneous vertebral augmentation.Frontiers in endocrinology · 2026Article
- Clinical and radiographical analysis of percutaneous kyphoplasty with multi-point cement anchoring technique for preventing bone cement displacement in Kümmell's disease of stage I and II.Frontiers in endocrinology · 2025Article
- Simultaneous minimally invasive surgery improves outcomes and reduces complications in elderly with combined osteoporotic fractures.American journal of translational research · 2025Article
- Percutaneous kyphoplasty improves surgical outcomes and quality of life in elderly patients with osteoporotic vertebral compression fractures.American journal of translational research · 2025Article
- A biomechanical investigation comparing a novel bone cement bridging screw system with conventional treatment methods for Kummell's disease.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- Digital Subtraction Angiography-Guided Percutaneous Kyphoplasty in Treatment of Multi-Segmental Osteoporotic Vertebral Compression Fracture: A retrospective single-Center study.Journal of pain research · 2023Article
- Unilateral Percutaneous Kyphoplasty with O-Arm Navigation for the Treatment of Kümmell's Disease.Journal of pain research · 2022Article
- Is Kummell's Disease a Misdiagnosed and/or an Underreported Complication of Osteoporotic Vertebral Compression Fractures? A Pattern of the Condition and Available Treatment Modalities.Journal of clinical medicine · 2021Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundA systematic review and meta-analysis to assess the pros and cons of percutaneous vertebroplasty (PVP) versus kyphoplasty (PKP) for osteoporotic vertebral compression fractures (OVCFs) with intravertebral cleft (IVC) including all available evidence from controlled trials.
methodsDatabases including Pubmed, Embase, Cochrane Library, China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), and Wanfang Data were searched to identify relevant studies comparing PVP and PKP for OVCFs with IVC. The outcomes mainly included visual analog scale (VAS), Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), local kyphotic angle (LKA), rate of vertebral height (VH%), and adverse events.
resultsNine studies enrolling 688 patients were eligible for meta-analysis. The results indicated no significant differences between the two groups in the short-and long-term VAS, ODI, LKA, or VH% (P > 0.05). Compared with PVP, PKP was associated with significantly longer operation time (P < 0.05), higher cost (P > 0.05), and more injected cement volume (P < 0.05). In terms of adverse events, PKP has a lower risk of cement leakage (P < 0.05), while with no significant difference in adjacent-level fracture rates (P > 0.05).
conclusionThe two procedures have similar short- and long-term pain relief, functional recovery, local kyphosis correction, and vertebral height maintenance in OVCFs with IVC. PKP is superior to PVP for the injected cement volume, and lower cement leakage rate, however, with longer operation time, more fluoroscopy times, and higher cost. Further randomized controlled trials (RCTs) should be conducted to confirm these results.
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.