Published in:
01-06-2018 | Original Paper
Is percutaneous kyphoplasty the better choice for minimally invasive treatment of neurologically intact osteoporotic Kümmell’s disease? A comparison of two minimally invasive procedures
Published in: International Orthopaedics | Issue 6/2018
Login to get accessAbstract
Purpose
The purpose of this study was to compare and evaluate the safety and efficacy of percutaneous vertebroplasty at a hyperextension position (PVPHP) and percutaneous kyphoplasty at a hyperextension position (PKPHP) for the treatment of osteoporotic Kümmell’s disease.
Methods
This study was a retrospective, single-centre study. There were 35 patients with osteoporotic Kümmell’s disease who were analyzed. Twenty-two of them underwent PVPHP and the other 13 patients underwent PKPHP from January 2013 to January 2015. The volume of bone cement injection and operation costs were compared. We compared the visual analogue score (VAS) and vertebral Cobb’s angle at pre-operation, the second day after operation, and the final follow-up. We compared the Oswestry disability index (ODI) score at the pre-operation and the final follow-up.
Results
There were no significant differences in gender, age, course of disease, bone mineral density (BMD), and mean follow-up time between the two groups (P > 0.05). Regarding the costs of the operation, the PKPHP group was significantly higher than the PVPHP group (P < 0.05). Compared with the pre-operation (P < 0.05), the post-operative ODI score, VAS, and Cobb’s angle of the two groups were improved significantly. Even though the correction of Cobb’s angle in the PKPHP group was slightly better than the PVPHP position group, there were no significant differences between two groups (P > 0.05). At the final follow-up, the Cobb’s angle was increased in both groups, but there was no significant difference (P > 0.05). There was no significant difference in the bone cement leakage rate between the two groups (P > 0.05).
Conclusion
For the treatment of Kümmell’s disease, PVPHP and PKPHP are both safe and effective, but PVPHP is more economical and can be considered a preferred method of treatment.