ArticleOrthopedic reviews2022
Three generations of treatments for osteoporotic vertebral fractures: what is the evidence?
Article in Orthopedic reviews, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Multifunctional MoS₂-PMMA bone cement with enhanced strength and antibacterial activity to overcome limitations of conventional materials in orthopedic surgery.BMC musculoskeletal disorders · 2026Article
- Health-related Quality of Life After Vertebral Augmentation for Osteoporotic Vertebral Compression Fractures.Current osteoporosis reports · 2026Review
- Technical Limitations and Implant Developments in Percutaneous Kyphoplasty for Osteoporotic Vertebral Compression Fractures.Orthopaedic surgery · 2026Review
- Integrating BMSC-inlaid GelMA hydrogels and melatonin-loaded PLGA microspheres into silk fibroin/nanohydroxyapatite scaffolds to repair osteoporotic bone defects.Journal of orthopaedic surgery and research · 2026Article
- Preliminary Anatomical and Surgical Assessment of Combined Percutaneous Resection and Proximal Medial Gastrocnemius Release vs Historical Controls in Treating Haglund syndrome: A Mixed Prospective-Retrospective Study.Foot & ankle orthopaedics · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The management of vertebral compression fractures (VCFs) is based on conservative treatment and minimally invasive vertebral augmentation procedures. However, the role of vertebral augmentation is now being questioned by clinical trials and extensive studies. The aim of this review is to report the most relevant evidences on effectiveness, safety, and indications of the currently available vertebral augmentation techniques. Conservative treatment with bracing is effective in reducing acute but it has no effect on segmental kyphosis progression and pseudoarthrosis can occur. Percutaneous vertebroplasty (PV) was the first vertebral augmentation technique to be proposed for the treatment of VCFs. Two blinded and randomized clinical trials compared PV to a sham procedure and no significant differences in terms of efficacy were reported. More recent studies have suggested that PV can still benefit patients with acute VCFs and severe pain at onset. Balloon kyphoplasty (BK) was developed to improve the segmental alignment restoring the height of collapsed vertebrae. BK allows similar pain relief and disability improvement, as well as greater kyphosis correction compared to PV, moreover BKP seems to reduce cement leakage. Vertebral body stenting (VBS) and the KIVA system are third generation techniques of vertebral augmentation. VBS aims to increase the effectiveness in restoring the segmental alignment, while the KIVA system can prevent cement leakage. These techniques are effective and safe, even if their superiority to BK has yet to be proven by studies with a high level of evidence.
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.