OUTCOMES OF VERTEBROPLASTY FOR TREATMENT OF PATHOLOGIC VERTEBRAL FRACTURES AND HAEMANGIOMAS

Objective. To compare the intensity of pain-relieving effect of percutaneous vertebroplasty (PV) in patients with gemangiomas, osteoporotic vertebral fractures, and malignant metastases.

Matherial and Methods. 210 percutaneous vertebroplasties (VP) were performed in 121 patients at the age of 18 to 87 years. Out of them 22 patients had metastases into vertebral body/bodies, 72 patients – osteoporotic fractures, and 27 patients – vertebral haemangiomas with high-grade pain syndrome. The levels of vertebroplasty were between T3 and S1, predominantly (178 cases) from T9 to L4 levels. Significant anatomic abnormalities in seven cases required CT-guidance of the percutaneous vertebroplasty. Pain syndrome intensity before and after PV was assessed by visualanalogue scale.

Results. Percutaneous vertebroplasty resulted in significant pain relief in all patients. One hundred-and-one patients reported full satisfaction with treatment, 17 patients – partial satisfaction, and 3 patients were not satisfied. Vertebroplasty complicated by cement leakage into the spinal canal in two patients with multiple myeloma. One patient with osteoporotic fractures has developed L5 radiculopathy after four-level PV, which was eliminated in 5 days. Three patients had transient complications.

Conclusion. The achieved results confirm a high painrelieving efficacy of percutaneous vertebroplasty. A choice of vertebroplasy technique depends on a nature of pathology and peculiarities of vertebral anatomy. Application of cement based on calcium phosphate, bioceramic and bone morphogenetic proteins improves the long-term outcomes of percutaneous vertebroplasty.

1. Aksiks I., Vestermanis V., Karklins E., et al. Pain relief after vertebroplasty in patients with osteoporotic and metastatic vertebral compression fractures and haemangiomas // International Proceedings of 13th World Congress of Neurological Surgery. 2005. P. 37–40.

2. Bauer T.W., Smith S.T. Bioactive materials in orthopaedic surgery. Overview and regulatory considerations // Clin. Orthop. Relat. Res. 2002. N 395. P. 11–22.

3. Belkoff S.M., Mathis J.M., Jasper L.E., et al. The Biomechanics of verteberoplasty. The effect of cement volume on mechanical behavior // Spine. 2001. Vol. 26. P. 1537–1541.

4. Chiras J., Depriester C., Weill A., et al. [Percutaneous vertebral surgery. Technics and indications] // J. Neuroradiol. 1997. Vol. 24. P. 45–59. French.

5. Cloft H.J., Dion J.E. Preoperative and palliative embolization of vertebral tumors // Neuroimaging Clin. N. Am. 2000. Vol. 10. P. 569–578.

6. Cotten A., Dewatre F., Cortet B. Percutaneous vertebroplasty for osteolytic metastases and myeloma: effects of the percentage of lesion filling and the leakage of methyl methacrylate at clinical follow-up // Radiology. 1996. Vol. 200. P. 525–530.

7. Doppman J.L., Oldfield E.H., Heiss J.D. Symptomatic vertebral hemangiomas: treatment by means of direct intralesional injections of ethanol // Radiology. 2000. Vol. 214. P. 341–348.

8. Galibert P., Deramond H., Rosat P., et al. [Preliminary note on the treatment of vertebral angioma by percutaneous acrylic vertebroplasty] // Neurochirurgie. 1987. Vol. 33. P. 166–168. French.

9. Gangi A., Kastler B.A., Dietermann J.L. Percutaneous vertebroplasty guided by a combination of CT and fluoroscopy // Am. J. Neuroradiol. 1994. Vol. 15. P. 83–86.

10. Garfin S.R., Yuan H.A., Reiley M.A. New technologies in spine: kyphoplasty and vertebroplasty for the treatment of painful osteoporotic compression fractures // Spine. 2001. Vol. 26. P. 1511–1515.

11. Hardouin P., Grados F., Cotten A., et al. Should percutaneous vertebroplasty be used to treat osteoporotic fractures? An update // Joint Bone Spine. 2001. Vol. 68. P. 216–221.

12. Heini P.F., Berlemann U. Bone substitutes in vertebroplasty // Eur. Spine J. 2001. Vol. 10. Suppl. 2. P. S205–S213.

13. Heini P.F., Wälchli B., Berlemann U. Percutanoeus transpedicular vertebroplasty with PMMA: operative technique and early results. A prospective study for the treatment of osteoporotic compression fractures // Euro. Spine J. 2000. Vol. 9. P. 445–450.

14. Hoffmann R.T., Jakobs T.F., Wallnöfer A., et al. [Percutaneous vertebroplasty (pv): indications, contraindications, technique] // Radiology. 2003. Vol. 43. P. 709–717. German.

15. Lewis M.M. Bone tumors: evaluation and treatment // Orthop. Clin. North Am. 1989. Vol. 20. P. 273–518.

16. Licata A.A. Quality-of-life of osteoporotic patients – The impact of vertebral compression fractures // Advances in osteoporotic fracture managements. 2001. Vol. 1. P. 2–6.

17. Olerud C., Jonsson B. Surgical palliation of symptomatic spinal metastases // Acta Orthop. Scand. 1996. Vol. 67. P. 513–522.

18. Padovani B., Kasriel O., Brunner P., et al. Pulmonary embolism caused by acrylic cement: a rare complication of percutaneous vertebroplasty // AJNR Am. J. Neuroradiol. 1999. Vol. 20. P. 375–377.

19. Philips F.M., Paul R., Lieberman I.H. Kyphoplasty for the treatment of osteoporotic and osteolytic vertebral compression fractures // Advances in osteoporotic fracture management. 2001. Vol. 1. P. 7–11.

20. Predey T.A., Sewall L.E., Smith S.J. Percutaneous vertebroplasty: New treatment for vertebral compression fractures // Am. Fam. Physician. 2002. Vol. 66. P. 611-615.

21. Tohmeh A.G., Mathis J.M., Fenton D.C., et al. Biomechanical efficacy of unipedicular versus bipedicular vertebroplasty for the management of osteoporotic compression fractures // Spine. 1999. Vol. 24. P. 1772–1776.

22. Verlaan J.J., Dhert W.J., Verbout A.J., et al. Balloon vertebroplasty in combination with pedicle screw instrumentation // Spine. 2005.Vol. 30. P. E73–E79.

23. Yamamoto H. Vertebroplasty and bone substitutes in the management of spinal osteoporosis // J. Bone Joint Surg. Br. 2001. Vol. 83. Suppl. IV. P. 398.

24. Yoon S.T., Boden S.D. Osteoinductive molecules in orthopaedics: basic science and preclinical studies // Clin. Orthop. Relat. Res. 2002. N 395. P. 33–43.