SynthesisJournal of orthopaedic surgery and research2025
Optimal management for osteoporotic vertebral compression fractures: a network meta-analysis.
Synthesis 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 10 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
10 citing papers in PubMed.
- Percutaneous pedicle screw combined with percutaneous kyphoplasty for osteoporotic vertebral compression fractures with endplate depression: A randomized controlled trial.The Journal of international medical research · 2026Trial
- Outcomes following structural allograft-chain impaction kyphoplasty.North American Spine Society journal · 2026Article
- Age predicts long-term functional outcomes following vertebroplasty for osteoporotic vertebral compression fractures: a retrospective cohort study.Journal of spine surgery (Hong Kong) · 2026Article
- Oral Food Supplement with Bio-Activated Silicium and Vitamins D3 and K2 in the Conservative Management of Osteoporotic Vertebral Compression Fractures.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Article
- Osteoporosis: The Renascent Impact of Vertebral Fractures-A Narrative Review of Diagnosis, Risk Stratification, and Integrated Management.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Review
- Article
- Health-related Quality of Life After Vertebral Augmentation for Osteoporotic Vertebral Compression Fractures.Current osteoporosis reports · 2026Review
- Development and validation of a predictive model for postoperative residual low back pain following percutaneous kyphoplasty or percutaneous vertebroplasty.American journal of translational research · 2026Article
- Prescribing Trends of Osteoporosis Medications, Adherence and Persistence with Denosumab versus Alendronate: A Real-World Retrospective Study in China.Patient preference and adherence · 2026Article
- Effect of dominant cement distribution zone on pain relief after unipedicular percutaneous vertebroplasty.Frontiers in surgery · 2026Article
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.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundOptimal management of osteoporotic vertebral compression fractures (OVCFs) remains controversial. This network meta‑analysis (NMA) evaluated the relative efficacy and safety of third‑generation percutaneous vertebral augmentation (TVA), percutaneous kyphoplasty (PKP), percutaneous vertebroplasty (PVP), and non‑surgical management (NSM) in OVCFs.
methodsA systematic search of PubMed, Embase, the Cochrane Library, and Web of Science was conducted from inception to February 1, 2025, to identify clinical trials comparing ≥ 2 of these interventions. Primary outcomes included pain intensity (Visual Analog Scale [VAS]), functional disability (Oswestry Disability Index [ODI]), quality of life (EQ‑5D), and anterior vertebral body height (AVB). Adverse events, including adjacent vertebral fracture (AVF) and bone cement leakage (BCL), were also assessed.
resultsForty‑six studies (23 RCTs and 23 comparative cohort studies; n = 5,660) were included. Both TVA and PKP yielded greater VAS reductions than NSM at short‑term (≤ 6 months; MD - 1.28 and - 1.37; 95% CI - 1.62 to - 0.93 and - 1.82 to - 0.92) and long‑term (> 6 months; MD - 0.86 and - 0.69; 95% CI - 1.22 to - 0.50 and - 1.20 to - 0.19) follow‑up. TVA outperformed NSM in ODI improvement at short‑term (MD - 6.84; 95% CI - 9.84 to - 3.84) and long‑term (MD - 9.14; 95% CI - 14.64 to - 3.65); PKP surpassed NSM short‑term (MD - 5.59; 95% CI - 9.32 to - 1.86) but was inferior to TVA long‑term (MD 8.34; 95% CI 2.62 to 14.06). Surgical interventions uniformly outperformed NSM in quality‑of‑life gains. TVA and PKP achieved greater AVB restoration than NSM, whereas PVP carried a higher BCL risk compared to TVA and PKP. NSM was associated with the lowest probability of AVF (90.2%).
conclusionsAlthough PKP offers the greatest long‑term preservation of AVB, third‑generation TVA appears superior to PVP, PKP, and NSM in improving pain, functional disability, quality of life, and safety in OVCF patients. High‑quality randomized trials with extended follow‑up are required to confirm these findings.
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.