Kyphoplasty and Vertebroplasty in vertebral fractures

Kyphoplasty and Vertebroplasty

• Epidemiology of osteoporotic fractures• Natural history• Morbidity and mortality• Conservative treatment• Vertebroplasty/Kyphoplasty• How its done• Selection of patients and imaging

Kyphoplasty and Vertebroplasty

• Results• Vertebroplasty v Kyphoplasty• Acute v Chronic fractures• Controversies• Other indications• Future developments

EpidemiologyRadiographic

• 25 % in post menopausal females

• 40% in women > 80yrs• Age group 65 yrs+ are

fastest growing segment of the population

• Less common in men• Melton et al. Epidemiology of vertebral

fractures in women. Am J Epidemiol 1989; 129:1000-11.

Consequences of vertebral fractures

• Sentinel sign of failing health

• 35-40% increase in cancer deaths

• 23-34% increase in mortality rates

• 5yr survival 61% cf. 76%• Cooper C et al. Population based study of

survival after osteoporotic fractures. Am J Epidemiol 1993:137;1001-5.

Clinical incidence

• Majority are asymptomatic

• Loss of height and stooped posture

• 23-33% are painful• Over ⅔rds become

manageable or asymptomatic in 6-12 weeks

• Cooper C et al. The epidemiology of vertebral fractures. Bone 1993-14.611-5

Predictors of fracture

• Age• Sex• Osteoporosis• Inactivity• Smoking• 20-30% are multiple• Previous fracture

Predictors of fracture

Predictors of fracture 19.2% of females with a

confirmed incidental fracture had a second fracture within one year.

24% of females with two or more fractures developed a further fracture within a year.

Lindsay et al. JAMA 2001; 285: 320-3.

Evaluation• Severe back pain• Often no history of

trauma• Pain is worse upright• Thoracic kyphosis• Pain reproduced by

pressure over spinous process

• Very rare neurological deficit

• Exclude other causes

Evaluation

Think twice!

• Fractures above T6• Less than 55 yrs without

history of trauma• Patients with known

malignancy

Radiographic evaluationof age of fracture

• Plain films• MRI Low signal T1 High signal T2 High signal STIRBest indicator of age is the

history.

Bone Scan

• Not as commonly used as MRI

• Been show to have a 93% predictive value in vertebroplasty!

• May be abnormal when MRI is normal

• Maynard et al. Value of bone scan imaging in predicting pain relief in vertebroplasty. AJNR 2000;21:1807-12.

Treatment

• Pain relief• Exercise• Diet• Osteoporosis• Brace?

Vertebroplasty / KyphoplastyWhat is it?

Vertebroplasty Kyphoplasty

How does it work?

• Structural support – but no good correlation with amount of cement injected

• Thermal properties• Decompression• Placebo

How is it done?

• Usually performed under general anaesthetic

• Can be performed under local

• Day case procedure• Minimal invasive

How is it done?

How is it done?

How is it done?

Vertebroplasty Kyphoplasty

How is it done?

Indications for vertebroplasty/kyphoplasty

• Only needed in a small subset of patients

• High signal on STIR.• Pain on percussion• Increased activity on

bone scan• T5 and below-

kyphoplasty• Timing?

Contraindications

• Infection• Uncorrectable

coagulopathy• Anaesthetic Risk• Neurology• Middle column

compromise is NOT.

Complications

• Very few cliniccal relevant complications.• Cement extravasation 70%+• Pulmonary embolus 70%+

Results

Vertebroplasty• Significant better pain and

functional improvement than conservative treatment at 3 months.

• No difference at twelve months.

• Vertebroplasty patients had significantly more pain than the conservative group.

• Hulme PA et al. Vertebroplasty and kyphoplasty: a systematic review of 69 clinical studies. Spine 2006:31;1983-2001.

Kyphoplasty• FREE trial.• 300 patients randomised.• Assessed at one year• SF 36 PCS 0-100.• Kyphoplasty 26 33.4• Conservative 25.5 27.4 p<0.0001 Wardlaw D et al Lancet 2009;21:1016-24

ControversiesNo Benefit

• A Randomized Trial of Vertebroplasty for painful Osteoporotic Vertebral Fractures

• Buckbinder R et al. NEJM 2009;361:557-568.

• A Randomized Trial of Vertebroplasty for Osteoporotic Spinal Fractures

• Kalmes DF et al. NEJM 2009;361: 569-579.

• No improvement against sham procedure at 1 week, or at 1,3 or 6 months.

Controversies No Benefit

• Previous studies – lack of blinding, lack of true sham control. Couldn’t exclude a placebo effect.

• NEJM studies- randomised, blinded and a sham procedure. Buckbinder needle against lamina. Kalmes – local anaesthetic around the facet joint.

ProblemsFracture acuity

Buckbinder: bone marrow oedema indicates an acute fracture but a detectable fracture line sufficed for inclusion.

Kalmes only used MRI or Bone scan in which fracture age was uncertain.

• Both groups had to have a fracture less than a year old- most groups would use 6 weeks as an acute fracture definition.

ProblemsEnrollment

• Kalmes: 1812 patients initially screened,only 131 entered into study. Most common reason – patient refusal.

• Buckbinder: Needed 4.5 years in 4 high volume centres to accrue 78 patients- 141 declined randomisation.

• Pain severity of groups who refused not reported.

ProblemsControl Group

• Is injection of local anaesthetic around the facet joint a sham procedure?

Vertos II Study

• Prospective randomised trial vertebroplasty v conservative treatment. 202 patients.

• Results Vertebroplasty had better pain relief at one year.

• All fractures less than six weeks old.• Klazen C et al Lancet 2010:376;1085-1092.

Timing

• The best evidence is that the best results are achieved within 6 weeks of onset!

• Rarely achievable in the UK• 50% + get better within 6 weeks

conservatively treated.• Philosophical when to treat.• Most fractures treated in UK > 3 months old.

TimingOlder fractures

• No randomised control trials for efficacy of treatment of old fractures.

• There are trials suggesting similar success rates to acute fractures of 80% success in fractures a year or older.

• Brown et al. Treatment of Chronic symptomatic vertebral compression fractures with percutaneous vertebroplasty . AJN 2004;182:319-312.

My protocol

• Fractures less than 6 weeks old who need to be hospitilised.

• Failure of conservative treatment after 3 months

• Vertebroplasty for all except where middle column is involved – Kyphoplasty,

• Bone scan +ve

Vertebroplasty v Kyphoplasty

Vertebroplasty• Cheaper• Quicker

Kyphoplasty• Expensive• Takes longer• Restoration of vertebral

height?• Less adjacent fractures• Less cement leakage• Quality of life

Vertebroplasty v Kyphoplasty

A review of 168 studies.Vertebroplasty• Mean change in VAS 5.68

• New fracture 17.9%

• Cement leak 19.7%

Kyphoplasty• Mean change in VAS 4.60

p<0.001• New fracture 14.1%

p<0.01• Cement leak 7.0%

p<0.001

• Comparison of vertebroplasty and kyphoplasty in vertebral compression fractures: a meta-analysis of the literature. Spine J 2008;8:488-97.

Other Uses

• Tumours• Trauma• Myeloma

Other uses

• Sacroplasty• Sacral insufficiency

fractures• Best performed under

CT guidance.

Developments

• Calcium phosphate in young patients with traumatic fractures

• Prophylaxis• Adding chemotherapy

agents or radioactive isotopes to the cement in tumour

Conclusions

• Vertebroplasty/Kyphoplasty is useful in the treatment of vertebral osteoporotic fractures although some controversy still exists.

• Low morbidity• Should be considered in painful fractures over

6 weeks old.