Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Review
. 2020 Dec 7:2020:3947368.
doi: 10.1155/2020/3947368. eCollection 2020.

Advances in Vertebral Augmentation Systems for Osteoporotic Vertebral Compression Fractures

Yufeng Long  1 , Weihong Yi  2 , Dazhi Yang  1   2
Affiliations
Review

Advances in Vertebral Augmentation Systems for Osteoporotic Vertebral Compression Fractures

Yufeng Long et al. Pain Res Manag. .

Abstract

Osteoporotic vertebral compression fracture (OVCF) is a common cause of pain and disability and is steadily increasing due to the growth of the elderly population. To date, percutaneous vertebroplasty (PVP) and percutaneous kyphoplasty (PKP) are almost universally accepted as appropriate vertebral augmentation procedures for OVCFs. There are many advantages of vertebral augmentation, such as short surgical time, performance under local anaesthesia, and rapid pain relief. However, there are certain issues regarding the utilization of these vertebral augmentations, such as loss of vertebral height, cement leakage, and adjacent vertebral refracture. Hence, the treatment for OVCF has changed in recent years. Satisfactory clinical results have been obtained worldwide after application of the OsseoFix System, the SpineJack System, radiofrequency kyphoplasty of the vertebral body, and the Kiva VCF treatment system. The following review discusses the development of the current techniques used for vertebral augmentation.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare that they have no conflicts of interest.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Male patient with back pain due to osteoporotic fracture of the L1 vertebral body. The frontal and the lateral fluoroscopy view—needles were placed in the anterior third of L1 vertebral bodies and cement injection was finished under continuous fluoroscopy.
Figure 2
Figure 2
(a) The balloon was inflated to restore the height of the fractured vertebra and to create a cavity within the vertebra. (b) Frontal fluoroscopy view when bone cement was injected into the fractured vertebra. (c) Lateral fluoroscopy view when bone cement was injected into the fractured vertebra.
Figure 3
Figure 3
(a) OsseoFix® System. (b) Osteoporotic vertebral fracture lateral fluoroscopy view [39].
Figure 4
Figure 4
(a) Radiofrequency device and application system: (A) multiplex controller, (B) hydraulic assembly, (C) master syringe, (D) activation element, (E) locking delivery cannula, (F) StabiliT introducer-working cannula and stylet, (G) activation element cable, (H) hand switch cable, (I) straight line osteotome, (J) power curve navigating osteotome, and (K) StabiliT ER2 bone cement [52]. (b) Intraoperative X-ray of L1 vertebra (lateral view) using RFK [52].
Figure 5
Figure 5
A percutaneous nitinol coil guidewire (a) is coiled within the cancellous portion of the fractured vertebral body. (b) Afterwards, a radiopaque PEEK implant is delivered incrementally via the nitinol coil guidewire (c) and then a nesting, cylindrical column is formed that provides vertical displacement, which may restore the height of the fractured vertebra (d) [10]. Fluoroscopic images illustrating the procedure of using the Kiva VCF treatment system (e). After removing the coil, a radiopaque PEEK implant was implanted (f) to provide structural support to the vertebral body and then bone cement was injected through the implant, as shown by lateral (g) and anteroposterior (h) fluoroscopic images [10].
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Karmakar A., Acharya S., Biswas D., Sau A. Evaluation of percutaneous vertebroplasty for management of symptomatic osteoporotic compression fracture. Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research. 2017;11(8):RC7–RC10. doi: 10.7860/jcdr/2017/25886.10461. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Beall D. P., Olan W. J., Kakad P., Li Q., Hornberger J. Economic analysis of Kiva VCF treatment system compared to balloon kyphoplasty using randomized Kiva safety and effectiveness trial (KAST) data. Pain Physician. 2015;18(3):E299–E306. - PubMed
    1. Longo U. G., Loppini M., Denaro L., Maffulli N., Denaro V. Osteoporotic vertebral fractures: current concepts of conservative care. British Medical Bulletin. 2012;102(1):171–189. doi: 10.1093/bmb/ldr048. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Yuan W.-H., Hsu H.-C., Lai K.-L. Vertebroplasty and balloon kyphoplasty versus conservative treatment for osteoporotic vertebral compression fractures: a meta-analysis. Medicine. 2016;95(31) doi: 10.1097/md.0000000000004491.e4491 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Longo U. G., Loppini M., Denaro L., Maffulli N., Denaro V. Conservative management of patients with an osteoporotic vertebral fracture: a review of the literature. The Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery. British Volume. 2012;94(2):152–157. doi: 10.1302/0301-620x.94b2.26894. - DOI - PubMed

Publication types