The incidence of secondary vertebral fracture of vertebral augmentation techniques versus conservative treatment for painful osteoporotic vertebral fractures: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Percutaneous vertebroplasty (PVP) and balloon kyphoplasty (BKP) are minimally invasive and effective vertebral augmentation techniques for managing osteoporotic vertebral compression fractures (OVCFs). Recent meta-analyses have compared the incidence of secondary vertebral fractures between patients treated with vertebral augmentation techniques or conservative treatment; however, the inclusions were not thorough and rigorous enough, and the effects of each technique on the incidence of secondary vertebral fractures remain unclear. PURPOSE: To perform an updated systematic review and meta-analysis of the studies with more rigorous inclusion criteria on the effects of vertebral augmentation techniques and conservative treatment for OVCF on the incidence of secondary vertebral fractures. MATERIAL AND METHODS: PubMed, MEDLINE, EMBASE, SpringerLink, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Library database were searched for relevant original articles comparing the incidence of secondary vertebral fractures between vertebral augmentation techniques and conservative treatment for patients with OVCFs. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and prospective non-randomized controlled trials (NRCTs) were identified. The methodological qualities of the studies were evaluated, relevant data were extracted and recorded, and an appropriate meta-analysis was conducted. RESULTS: A total of 13 articles were included. The pooled results from included studies showed no statistically significant differences in the incidence of secondary vertebral fractures between patients treated with vertebral augmentation techniques and conservative treatment. Subgroup analysis comparing different study designs, durations of symptoms, follow-up times, races of patients, and techniques were conducted, and no significant differences in the incidence of secondary fractures were identified (P > 0.05). No obvious publication bias was detected by either Begg's test (P = 0.360 > 0.05) or Egger's test (P = 0.373 > 0.05). CONCLUSION: Despite current thinking in the field that vertebral augmentation procedures may increase the incidence of secondary fractures, we found no differences in the incidence of secondary fractures between vertebral augmentation techniques and conservative treatment for patients with OVCFs.

Comparison Between 7 Osteoporotic Vertebral Compression Fractures Treatments: Systematic Review and Network Meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Vertebroplasty (VP), kyphoplasty (KP), SpineJack system (SJ), radiofrequency kyphoplasty (RFK), Kiva system (Kiva), Sky kyphoplasty system (SK), and conservative treatment are widely used in the treatment of osteoporotic vertebral compression fractures (OVCFs). However, it is still unknown which is the best intervention. The aim of the current study was to evaluate the effectiveness and safety of VP, KP, SJ, RFK, Kiva, SK, and CT in the treatment of OVCFs. METHODS: Randomized controlled trials and cohort studies comparing VP, KP, SJ, RFK, Kiva, SK, or CT for the treatment of OVCFs were identified on the basis of databases including PubMed, the Cochrane Library, Web of Science, and Springer Link. A network meta-analysis was performed using STATA 15.1. RESULTS: A total of 56 studies with 6974 patients and 7 interventions were included in this study. The results of the surface under the cumulative probability demonstrated that SK was the best intervention in decreasing VAS scores and recovering middle vertebral height, RFK was the best intervention in improving ODI scores and decreasing incidence of new fractures, SJ was the best intervention to restore kyphosis angle, and Kiva was the best intervention to reduce incidence of bone cement leakage. Cluster analysis showed that SK was the preferable intervention on the basis of the outcomes of VAS, ODI, middle vertebral height, and kyphotic angle, and RFK was the preferable treatment in decreasing the incidence of adverse events. In our network meta-analysis, node-splitting analysis and loop inconsistency analysis showed no significant inconsistencies. CONCLUSIONS: SK may be the most effective treatment in relieving pain, improving the quality of life, and recovering vertebral body height and kyphotic angle, while RFK may be the safest intervention for OVCFs. However, considering the limitations of this study, more high-quality trials are needed in the future to confirm the current conclusion.