Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41442043›Full record

SynthesisEuropean spine journal : official publication of the European Spine Society, the European Spinal Deformity Society, and the European Section of the Cervical Spine Research Society2026

The establishment and validation of a risk appraisal model for cement leakage after percutaneous vertebral augmentation for osteoporotic vertebral compression fractures based on a meta-analysis.

Aotian Lao, Yu Wu, Shuai Ouyang, Zelin Zhou, Jian Zou, Zerui Liu, Zhigang Zhang, Guoliang Lu

Abstract readMeta-AnalysisReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in 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, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Cement leakage and post-operative outcomes after lower-versus higher-volume bone cement injection in percutaneous vertebroplasty: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.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 · 2026
    Review
  2. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors.

Aotian Lao *Dongguan Hospital of Guangzhou University of Chinese Medicine, Dongguan, China.
Yu Wu *Dongguan Hospital of Guangzhou University of Chinese Medicine, Dongguan, China.
Shuai OuyangDongguan Hospital of Guangzhou University of Chinese Medicine, Dongguan, China.
Zelin ZhouGuangzhou University of Chinese Medicine, Guangzhou, China.
Jian ZouDongguan Hospital of Guangzhou University of Chinese Medicine, Dongguan, China.
Zerui LiuDongguan Hospital of Guangzhou University of Chinese Medicine, Dongguan, China.
Zhigang ZhangDongguan Hospital of Guangzhou University of Chinese Medicine, Dongguan, China. Zhigang5658@163.com.
Guoliang LuDongguan Hospital of Guangzhou University of Chinese Medicine, Dongguan, China. Dglugl@163.com.

Funding

Dongguan Science and Technology of Social Development Program NO.20231800936872
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposePercutaneous vertebral augmentation (PVA) represents a mainstream minimally invasive surgical procedure for the treatment of osteoporotic vertebral compression fractures (OVCF). However, postoperative complications often arise from bone cement leakage (CL). This study aimed to conduct a comprehensive meta-analysis to identify risk factors for CL and established a risk appraisal model based on the findings.

methodsWe systematically reviewed seven major databases up to September 2024 to identify studies examining CL following PVA treatment in OVCF. Meta-analysis was performed using RevMan 5.4 software. The results were used to establish a risk appraisal model for CL.

resultsThe meta-analysis identified several factors, including Cobb angle, Bone mineral density, Cement viscosity, Cement volume injected, Stage of bone cement injection, Cortical defect, Fracture severity, Intravertebral vacuum cleft, Basivertebral foramen sign and Number of vertebral fractures. The risk appraisal model constructed type Logit(P) = − 0.621 + 0.412X Cobb angle + 0.842X BMD + 0.842X Cement viscosity + 0.495X Cement volume injected + 0.432X Stage of bone cement injection + 0.775X Cortical defect + 0.438X Fracture severity + 0.358X IVC + 1.015X Basivertebral foramen sign + 0.742X Number of vertebral fractures. The receiver operating characteristic curve (ROC) curve showed an area under curve (AUC) of 0.831, and the Hosmer-Lemeshow test showed χ2 = 5.933, which is a good predictor of CL.

conclusionThe risk appraisal model was validated to have a moderately effective predictive value and can serve as a valuable tool for clinicians to assess leakage risk and improve patient management strategies during surgical interventions.

Indexed as

Bone CementsExtravasation of Diagnostic and Therapeutic MaterialsFractures, CompressionOsteoporotic FracturesPostoperative ComplicationsSpinal FracturesVertebroplastyHumansRisk AssessmentRisk FactorsBone CementsCement leakageMeta-analysisOsteoporotic vertebral compression fracturesPercutaneous vertebral augmentationRisk appraisal modelRisk factors

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.