ArticleBMC musculoskeletal disorders2026
A retrospective comparative study of traditional PVP and bone cement pedicle-anchored PVP techniques for stage I and II Kümmell's disease.
Article in BMC musculoskeletal disorders, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundKümmell’s disease (KD), characterized by delayed vertebral collapse with intravertebral vacuum cleft (IVC), remains controversial in clinical management. Traditional percutaneous vertebroplasty (PVP) may lead to cement loosening and vertebral re-collapse due to insufficient mechanical interlocking between cement and bone. This study compared the clinical efficacy of bone cement pedicle-anchored PVP (BCPA-PVP) versus conventional PVP for Stage I and II KD.
methodsA retrospective analysis enrolled 79 patients with Stage I/II KD undergoing PVP or BCPA-PVP between March 2018 and January 2023. Patients were divided into four groups: Stage I PVP (n=18), Stage I BCPA-PVP (n=20), Stage II PVP (n=20), and Stage II BCPA-PVP (n=21). Clinical outcomes, including Visual Analog Scale (VAS) scores, Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), anterior vertebral height (AVH), Cobb angle, and complications, were evaluated preoperatively, postoperatively (day 1), and at final follow-up.
resultsFor Stage I KD, no significant differences emerged between PVP and BCPA-PVP groups at final follow-up: VAS (1.06±0.66 vs. 0.90±0.64), ODI (15.33±3.24 vs. 15.60±4.76), AVH (26.94±2.29 mm vs. 27.10±2.45 mm), or Cobb angle (5.22±1.17° vs. 5.10±1.52°) (all P > 0.05). No cement loosening occurred. In Stage II KD, the PVP group showed significantly worse outcomes at final follow-up compared to BCPA-PVP: VAS (2.60±1.85 vs. 1.14±1.01, P < 0.05), ODI (30.40±12.67 vs. 19.52±9.84, P < 0.05), and AVH (20.15±2.64 mm vs. 21.86±1.72 mm, P < 0.05). Cement leakage occurred in 30.4% (24/79), with higher rates in Stage II BCPA-PVP (42.8%, 9/21). Cement loosening was observed exclusively in Stage II PVP group (25%, 5/20).
conclusionConventional PVP can provide satisfactory outcomes for Stage I KD. However, BCPA-PVP is recommended for Stage II KD to reduce risks of cement loosening, vertebral re-collapse, and kyphotic progression.
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.