Surgical Trend Analysis for Use of Cement Augmented Pedicle Screws in Osteoporosis of Spine: A Systematic Review (2000-2017)
- PMID: 31552160
- PMCID: PMC6745638
- DOI: 10.1177/2192568218801570
Surgical Trend Analysis for Use of Cement Augmented Pedicle Screws in Osteoporosis of Spine: A Systematic Review (2000-2017)
Abstract
Study design: Systematic review.
Objectives: (1) Study indications for cement-augmented pedicle screws (CAPS) in patients with osteoporosis. Have they changed over the years (2000-2017)? Are there any differences in usage of CAPS based on the geographical region? (2) What were the outcome of the studies? (3) What are the complications associated with this technique?
Methods: Electronic database and reference list of desired articles were searched from the database (2000-2017). Articles were selected discussing indications, clinical and radiological outcomes, and complications in cases of preexistent osteoporosis treated surgically using CAPS.
Results: Seventeen studies were identified; 3 were comparative studies and had a control arm (cemented vs noncemented screws). Most studies originated from Europe (10) or Asia (7). Painful vertebral fracture with or without neurological deficit, Kummell's lesion, deformity and failure to respond to conservative treatment are the common indications for cement augmentation. Visual analogue scale score was the most commonly used to assess pain and average improvement after surgery was 6.1. Average improvement in kyphosis was 13.21° and average loss of correction at the end of the study was 3°. Cement leak was the most common complication observed and pulmonary cement embolism was the most dreaded complication. Nevertheless, majority of cement leaks discussed in studies were asymptomatic.
Conclusion: CAPS are being increasingly used in osteoporotic spine. Pain scores, functional quality of life, and neurological function indices were studied. CAPS improved anchorage in osteoporotic vertebra and helped improve/maintain clinical and radiological improvement. Common risks of cement leak were observed.
Keywords: PMMA; cement; osteoporosis; vertebral fracture.
Conflict of interest statement
Declaration of Conflicting Interests: The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.
Figures
References
-
- Cook SD, Salkeld SL, Stanley T, Faciane A, Miller SD. Biomechanical study of pedicle screw fixation in severely osteoporotic bone. Spine J. 2004;4:402–408. - PubMed
-
- Choma TJ, Pfeiffer FM, Swope RW, Hirner JP. Pedicle screw design and cement augmentation in osteoporotic vertebrae: effects of fenestrations and cement viscosity on fixation and extraction. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2012;37:E1628–E1632. - PubMed
-
- Moher D, Liberati A, Tetzlaff J, Altman DG; PRISMA Group. Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement. Ann Intern Med. 2009;151:264–269. - PubMed
-
- Wells GA, Shea B, O’Connell D, et al. The Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS) for assessing the quality of nonrandomized studies in meta-analyses. http://www.ohri.ca/programs/clinical_epidemiology/oxford.asp. Accessed August 31, 2018.
Publication types
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Miscellaneous