ArticleGlobal spine journal2022
The Effect of Vertebral Augmentation Procedure on Painful OVCFs: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.
Article in Global spine journal, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Percutaneous kyphoplasty for osteoporotic vertebral compression fractures performed in one-day surgery: safe and effective?Frontiers in surgery · 2025Article
- Correlations between Sagittal Parameters and Functional Scores in 65-Year-Old Osteoporotic Females with Vertebral Body Fracture under Low-Energy Mechanism.Journal of clinical medicine · 2024Article
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 at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
STUDY
designMeta-analysis.
objectiveTo systematically compare the effectiveness and safety of vertebral augmentation procedure (VAP) with non-surgical management (NSM) for the treatment of osteoporotic vertebrate compression fractures (OVCFs).
methodsSystematic reviews and meta-analyses with the comparison between VAP and NSM were identified to extract randomized controlled trials from electronic database. Additionally, recently published RCTs were identified. Two researchers independently extracted the data. The primary outcome of this meta-analysis was pain relief evaluated by visual analogue scale (VAS).
resultsTwenty RCTs involving 2566 patients with painful OVCFs were included. Significant differences were found between percutaneous vertebroplasty (PVP) and conservative treatment (CT) in VAS at each time point during follow-up period. The differences of VAS were not significant between PVP and sham procedure at most time points during follow-up period. In subgroup analysis based on fracture type and fracture location, significant differences of VAS were found between PVP and CT and were not found between PVP and sham procedure. In subgroup analysis of duration of back pain, significant differences were found between PVP and CT in VAS at 1 week, 3 month and 1 year. And the differences of VAS were not significant between PVP and CT at 1 month and 6 month.
conclusionBKP is considered sufficient to achieve good clinical outcomes. PVP is associated with on beneficial effect on treatment of painful OVCFs compared with sham procedure. The indication and timing of VAP need further research. More independently high-quality RCTs with sufficiently large sample sizes reporting cost-effectiveness are needed.
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.