ArticleJournal of orthopaedic surgery and research2025
Transverse process-pedicle approach versus conventional transpedicular approach in percutaneous kyphoplasty for osteoporotic vertebral compression fracture.
Article in Journal of orthopaedic surgery and research, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Transverse process-pedicle versus conventional transpedicular approach in percutaneous kyphoplasty for osteoporotic vertebral compression fractures: a systematic review and pilot meta-analysis.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 · 2026Pooled it
- Letter to "Risk Factors for Osteoporotic Vertebral Compression Fracture and Evaluation of Clinical Outcomes of Minimally Invasive Vertebral Augmentation".Global spine journal · 2026Article
- Genant grade-based stratification in percutaneous curved kyphoplasty: Superior early analgesic efficacy and cement distribution characteristics in moderate to severe osteoporotic vertebral compression fractures.Neurosurgical review · 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
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundOsteoporotic vertebral compression fracture (OVCF) has been shown to achieve favorable clinical outcomes after percutaneous kyphoplasty (PKP) performed via the transverse process-pedicle approach (TPPA). The aim of this study was to investigate the clinical advantages of PKP via TPPA for the treatment of OVCF, by comparing it with the conventional transpedicular approach (CTPA).
methodsA retrospective study was conducted to analyze data from 124 patients with single-segment OVCF who were treated in our department between January 2019 and December 2022. A 1:1 propensity score matching was performed based on characteristics including sex, age, BMI, injury location, and bone mineral density T-values. The patients were divided into two groups: the TPPA group (62 cases), in which PKP was performed via the TPPA, and the CTPA group (62 cases), in which PKP was performed via the CTPA. Clinical efficacy was evaluated by comparing the two groups in terms of operative time, frequency of intraoperative fluoroscopy, rate of satisfactory bone cement distribution, rate of bone cement leakage, incidence of refractures, and visual analogue scale (VAS) and Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) scores recorded at preoperative, 1-day, 3-month, 6-month, and 12-month postoperative time points. The Beck Index was also evaluated preoperatively, and at 1 day and 12 months postoperatively.
resultsThere were no significant differences in baseline characteristics between the two groups, indicating comparability (P > 0.05). All surgeries were completed successfully without complications such as nerve injury or pedicle fracture. No significant differences were found between the groups in terms of operative time, intraoperative bleeding, or radiation frequency (P > 0.05). However, the amount of bone cement injected was significantly greater in the TPPA group compared to the CTPA group (P < 0.05). At 1 day postoperatively, the VAS score and ODI in the TPPA group were significantly lower than those in the CTPA group (P < 0.05), indicating better immediate pain relief and function. No significant differences in VAS or ODI were observed between the groups at preoperative, 3-month, 6-month, or 12-month time points (P > 0.05). Both VAS and ODI scores showed steady improvement within each group, with significant differences between all consecutive time points (P < 0.05). The Beck Index at both 1 day and 12 months postoperatively was significantly higher in the TPPA group compared to the CTPA group (P < 0.05). Within-group comparisons also showed significant improvement in the Beck Index at both postoperative time points compared with preoperative values (P < 0.05). Additionally, the TPPA group demonstrated a significantly higher rate of satisfactory bone cement distribution than the CTPA group (P < 0.05).
conclusionsIn the treatment of OVCF with PKP, the TPPA demonstrated comparable surgical safety to the CTPA. However, TPPA offered advantages in achieving better bone cement distribution, more effective immediate postoperative pain relief, and superior restoration and maintenance of the height of the injured vertebral body. CLINICAL TRIAL NUMBER: Not applicable. This study is a retrospective study, it is not a clinical trail.
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.