ArticleEuropean radiology2026
Upper thoracic T1 and T2 percutaneous vertebroplasty: a review of 10 years of experience.
Article in European radiology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Robotic-Assisted Computed Tomography-Guided Percutaneous Bone Procedures: A Prospective Multicenter Pilot Study.Cardiovascular and interventional radiology · 2026Trial
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
15 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveT1 and T2 upper thoracic vertebroplasties (UTVs) represent a technical challenge due to various anatomical factors that impact the quality of fluoroscopic control and potentially increase procedural risks. The aim of this study is to report the feasibility and safety of T1-T2 UTV. MATERIALS AND
methodAll patients having undergone UTV (T1 or T2) from March 2012 to September 2021 in a single tertiary care teaching hospital were included. Patients without a post-procedure control CT scan were excluded. The following data were retrospectively collected: demographics, procedure indications, vertebroplasty level(s), bone needle position, procedure details, vertebral body volume, intracorporeal cement volume, complications (CIRSE score), and clinical follow-up. The primary outcome was procedural technical success, defined as achieving both a correct bone-needle trajectory avoiding the spinal canal and endplate-to-endplate cement filling, without any adverse events.
resultsForty patients (19 females, 21 males, average age 65 years [range 18-89]) were included, totaling 49 vertebrae with 31/49 (63%) T1 vertebroplasties. Of the 49 UTVs, 30 (61%) were performed to treat bone metastases from various cancers. The primary outcome, technical success, was achieved in 39/49 (79.5%) of the UTVs. Satisfactory bone needle trajectory was reported in 73/80 (91%) of the approaches, and endplate-to-endplate filling was achieved in 82% of cases. Cement leakage was observed on 84% of the post-operative control CT scans. Based on the CIRSE classification, no adverse events were reported.
conclusionUTV under fluoroscopic control is a challenging procedure, but it is technically achievable and safe. Procedure optimization is paramount to overcoming anatomical difficulties. KEY POINTS: Question This study aims to report the feasibility and safety of upper thoracic vertebroplasty (UTV) of T1 and T2 vertebrae, a challenging procedure, seldom reported. Findings T1 and T2 UTV is technically feasible and safe under fluoroscopic guidance. Clinical relevance T1 and T2 UTV remains a complex procedure despite demonstrating technical success and a low complication rate. The main limit to fluoroscopy-guided UTV, even with procedure optimization, is the quality of lateral-projection fluoroscopic control.
Indexed as
Identifiers
40643619What 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.