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
Autor(a) principal: | |
---|---|
Data de Publicação: | 2019 |
Outros Autores: | , , , , , , , , , , , |
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 |