Clinical comparison between a percutaneous hydraulic pressure delivery system and balloon tamp system using high-viscosity cement for the treatment of osteoporotic vertebral compression fractures

Detalhes bibliográficos
Autor(a) principal: Qin, Jie
Data de Publicação: 2019
Outros Autores: Li, Jianjun, Liu, Ying, Zhao, Bo, Dong, Hui, Dong, Bo, Zhang, Rui, Ning, Ning, Zhang, Xin, Cui, Feng, Li, Haopeng, He, Xijing, Wang, Dong
Tipo de documento: Artigo
Idioma: eng
Título da fonte: Clinics
Texto Completo: https://www.revistas.usp.br/clinics/article/view/158746
Resumo: OBJECTIVES: Osteoporotic vertebral compression fractures (OVCFs) affect the elderly population, especially postmenopausal women. Percutaneous kyphoplasty is designed to treat painful vertebral compression fractures for which conservative therapy has been unsuccessful. High-viscosity cement can be injected by either a hydraulic pressure delivery system (HPDS) or a balloon tamp system (BTS). Therefore, the purpose of this study was to compare the safety and clinical outcomes of these two systems. METHODS: A random, multicenter, prospective study was performed. Clinical and radiological assessments were carried out, including assessments of general surgery information, visual analog scale, quality of life, cement leakage, and height and angle restoration. RESULTS: Using either the HPDS or BTS to inject high-viscosity cement effectively relieved pain and improved the patients’ quality of life immediately, and these effects lasted at least two years. The HPDS using high-viscosity cement reduced cost, surgery time, and radiation exposure and showed similar clinical results to those of the BTS. In addition, the leakage rate and the incidence of adjacent vertebral fractures after the HPDS treatment were reduced compared with those after treatment using the classic vertebroplasty devices. However, the BTS had better height and angle restoration abilities. CONCLUSIONS: The percutaneous HPDS with high-viscosity cement has similar clinical outcomes to those of traditional procedures in the treatment of vertebral fractures in the elderly. The HPDS with high-viscosity cement is better than the BTS in the treatment of mild and moderate OVCFs and could be an alternative method for the treatment of severe OVCFs.
id USP-19_b24579bf09fcd1f7a8f5bc8e5f9d1637
oai_identifier_str oai:revistas.usp.br:article/158746
network_acronym_str USP-19
network_name_str Clinics
repository_id_str
spelling Clinical comparison between a percutaneous hydraulic pressure delivery system and balloon tamp system using high-viscosity cement for the treatment of osteoporotic vertebral compression fracturesOsteoporotic Vertebral Compression FracturePercutaneous KyphoplastyPercutaneous VertebroplastyHydraulic Pressure Delivery SystemBalloon Tamp SystemHigh-Viscosity CementOBJECTIVES: Osteoporotic vertebral compression fractures (OVCFs) affect the elderly population, especially postmenopausal women. Percutaneous kyphoplasty is designed to treat painful vertebral compression fractures for which conservative therapy has been unsuccessful. High-viscosity cement can be injected by either a hydraulic pressure delivery system (HPDS) or a balloon tamp system (BTS). Therefore, the purpose of this study was to compare the safety and clinical outcomes of these two systems. METHODS: A random, multicenter, prospective study was performed. Clinical and radiological assessments were carried out, including assessments of general surgery information, visual analog scale, quality of life, cement leakage, and height and angle restoration. RESULTS: Using either the HPDS or BTS to inject high-viscosity cement effectively relieved pain and improved the patients’ quality of life immediately, and these effects lasted at least two years. The HPDS using high-viscosity cement reduced cost, surgery time, and radiation exposure and showed similar clinical results to those of the BTS. In addition, the leakage rate and the incidence of adjacent vertebral fractures after the HPDS treatment were reduced compared with those after treatment using the classic vertebroplasty devices. However, the BTS had better height and angle restoration abilities. CONCLUSIONS: The percutaneous HPDS with high-viscosity cement has similar clinical outcomes to those of traditional procedures in the treatment of vertebral fractures in the elderly. The HPDS with high-viscosity cement is better than the BTS in the treatment of mild and moderate OVCFs and could be an alternative method for the treatment of severe OVCFs.Hospital das Clínicas, Faculdade de Medicina, Universidade de São Paulo2019-06-06info:eu-repo/semantics/articleinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersionapplication/pdfapplication/xmlhttps://www.revistas.usp.br/clinics/article/view/15874610.6061/clinics/2019/e741Clinics; Vol. 74 (2019); e741Clinics; v. 74 (2019); e741Clinics; Vol. 74 (2019); e7411980-53221807-5932reponame:Clinicsinstname:Universidade de São Paulo (USP)instacron:USPenghttps://www.revistas.usp.br/clinics/article/view/158746/153727https://www.revistas.usp.br/clinics/article/view/158746/153785Copyright (c) 2019 Clinicsinfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessQin, JieLi, JianjunLiu, YingZhao, BoDong, HuiDong, BoZhang, RuiNing, NingZhang, XinCui, FengLi, HaopengHe, XijingWang, Dong2019-06-06T12:46:04Zoai:revistas.usp.br:article/158746Revistahttps://www.revistas.usp.br/clinicsPUBhttps://www.revistas.usp.br/clinics/oai||clinics@hc.fm.usp.br1980-53221807-5932opendoar:2019-06-06T12:46:04Clinics - Universidade de São Paulo (USP)false
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv Clinical comparison between a percutaneous hydraulic pressure delivery system and balloon tamp system using high-viscosity cement for the treatment of osteoporotic vertebral compression fractures
title Clinical comparison between a percutaneous hydraulic pressure delivery system and balloon tamp system using high-viscosity cement for the treatment of osteoporotic vertebral compression fractures
spellingShingle Clinical comparison between a percutaneous hydraulic pressure delivery system and balloon tamp system using high-viscosity cement for the treatment of osteoporotic vertebral compression fractures
Qin, Jie
Osteoporotic Vertebral Compression Fracture
Percutaneous Kyphoplasty
Percutaneous Vertebroplasty
Hydraulic Pressure Delivery System
Balloon Tamp System
High-Viscosity Cement
title_short Clinical comparison between a percutaneous hydraulic pressure delivery system and balloon tamp system using high-viscosity cement for the treatment of osteoporotic vertebral compression fractures
title_full Clinical comparison between a percutaneous hydraulic pressure delivery system and balloon tamp system using high-viscosity cement for the treatment of osteoporotic vertebral compression fractures
title_fullStr Clinical comparison between a percutaneous hydraulic pressure delivery system and balloon tamp system using high-viscosity cement for the treatment of osteoporotic vertebral compression fractures
title_full_unstemmed Clinical comparison between a percutaneous hydraulic pressure delivery system and balloon tamp system using high-viscosity cement for the treatment of osteoporotic vertebral compression fractures
title_sort Clinical comparison between a percutaneous hydraulic pressure delivery system and balloon tamp system using high-viscosity cement for the treatment of osteoporotic vertebral compression fractures
author Qin, Jie
author_facet Qin, Jie
Li, Jianjun
Liu, Ying
Zhao, Bo
Dong, Hui
Dong, Bo
Zhang, Rui
Ning, Ning
Zhang, Xin
Cui, Feng
Li, Haopeng
He, Xijing
Wang, Dong
author_role author
author2 Li, Jianjun
Liu, Ying
Zhao, Bo
Dong, Hui
Dong, Bo
Zhang, Rui
Ning, Ning
Zhang, Xin
Cui, Feng
Li, Haopeng
He, Xijing
Wang, Dong
author2_role author
author
author
author
author
author
author
author
author
author
author
author
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv Qin, Jie
Li, Jianjun
Liu, Ying
Zhao, Bo
Dong, Hui
Dong, Bo
Zhang, Rui
Ning, Ning
Zhang, Xin
Cui, Feng
Li, Haopeng
He, Xijing
Wang, Dong
dc.subject.por.fl_str_mv Osteoporotic Vertebral Compression Fracture
Percutaneous Kyphoplasty
Percutaneous Vertebroplasty
Hydraulic Pressure Delivery System
Balloon Tamp System
High-Viscosity Cement
topic Osteoporotic Vertebral Compression Fracture
Percutaneous Kyphoplasty
Percutaneous Vertebroplasty
Hydraulic Pressure Delivery System
Balloon Tamp System
High-Viscosity Cement
description OBJECTIVES: Osteoporotic vertebral compression fractures (OVCFs) affect the elderly population, especially postmenopausal women. Percutaneous kyphoplasty is designed to treat painful vertebral compression fractures for which conservative therapy has been unsuccessful. High-viscosity cement can be injected by either a hydraulic pressure delivery system (HPDS) or a balloon tamp system (BTS). Therefore, the purpose of this study was to compare the safety and clinical outcomes of these two systems. METHODS: A random, multicenter, prospective study was performed. Clinical and radiological assessments were carried out, including assessments of general surgery information, visual analog scale, quality of life, cement leakage, and height and angle restoration. RESULTS: Using either the HPDS or BTS to inject high-viscosity cement effectively relieved pain and improved the patients’ quality of life immediately, and these effects lasted at least two years. The HPDS using high-viscosity cement reduced cost, surgery time, and radiation exposure and showed similar clinical results to those of the BTS. In addition, the leakage rate and the incidence of adjacent vertebral fractures after the HPDS treatment were reduced compared with those after treatment using the classic vertebroplasty devices. However, the BTS had better height and angle restoration abilities. CONCLUSIONS: The percutaneous HPDS with high-viscosity cement has similar clinical outcomes to those of traditional procedures in the treatment of vertebral fractures in the elderly. The HPDS with high-viscosity cement is better than the BTS in the treatment of mild and moderate OVCFs and could be an alternative method for the treatment of severe OVCFs.
publishDate 2019
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv 2019-06-06
dc.type.driver.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/article
info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion
format article
status_str publishedVersion
dc.identifier.uri.fl_str_mv https://www.revistas.usp.br/clinics/article/view/158746
10.6061/clinics/2019/e741
url https://www.revistas.usp.br/clinics/article/view/158746
identifier_str_mv 10.6061/clinics/2019/e741
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv eng
language eng
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv https://www.revistas.usp.br/clinics/article/view/158746/153727
https://www.revistas.usp.br/clinics/article/view/158746/153785
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv Copyright (c) 2019 Clinics
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
rights_invalid_str_mv Copyright (c) 2019 Clinics
eu_rights_str_mv openAccess
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv application/pdf
application/xml
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv Hospital das Clínicas, Faculdade de Medicina, Universidade de São Paulo
publisher.none.fl_str_mv Hospital das Clínicas, Faculdade de Medicina, Universidade de São Paulo
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv Clinics; Vol. 74 (2019); e741
Clinics; v. 74 (2019); e741
Clinics; Vol. 74 (2019); e741
1980-5322
1807-5932
reponame:Clinics
instname:Universidade de São Paulo (USP)
instacron:USP
instname_str Universidade de São Paulo (USP)
instacron_str USP
institution USP
reponame_str Clinics
collection Clinics
repository.name.fl_str_mv Clinics - Universidade de São Paulo (USP)
repository.mail.fl_str_mv ||clinics@hc.fm.usp.br
_version_ 1800222764167069696