Effects of unilateral and bilateral vertebroplasty on coronal balance

Year 2025, Volume: 11 Issue: 2, 304 - 310

Mehmet Meral , Rahmi Kemal Koç

https://doi.org/10.18621/eurj.1588127

Abstract

Objectives: Percutaneous vertebroplasty is frequently used to treat osteoporotic vertebral compression fractures (OVCFs) due to its low surgical risks. In this study, we tried to determine the early and late effects of single-pedicle and double-pedicle PVPs on the coronal balance of the vertebrae.

Methods: This study evaluated 95 OVCF patients treated with PVP between 2008 and 2023. Of these patients, 36 were treated with bilateral and 59 with unilateral vertebroplasty. The Coronal Cobb angle, coronal segmental Cobb angle, and coronal balance of the vertebrae were measured in preoperative, early postoperative, and 6-month postoperative radiographs. The results were compared between the two groups and the effects of single or double pedicle procedure on these values were analyzed.

Results: Two study groups were formed, consisting of a total of 95 patients. The mean age was 69.1 years. Fourty-nine patients were female and 46 were male. No significant difference was detected between the groups regarding gender and age. When the data obtained in the preoperative and early postoperative period in patients who underwent single and double pedicle vertebroplasty were evaluated, no statistically significant difference was obtained in coronal balance, Cobb angle, and segmentary Cobb angle measurements.

Conclusions: From the radiographic point of view in the long-term follow-up, we think that bilateral PVP provides an advantage over the unilateral approach in maintaining the coronal balance and stabilization of the coronal Cobb angle in patients with OVCF.

Keywords

Coronal balance at vertebra, percutaneous vertebroplasty, Cobb angle, coronal balance

References

• 1. Diniz JM, Botelho RV. Is fusion necessary for thoracolumbar burst fracture treated with spinal fixation? A systematic review and meta-analysis. J Neurosurg Spine. 2017;27(5):584-592. doi: 10.3171/2017.1.SPINE161014.
• 2. Bademci G, Aydın Z, Batay F, Attar A, Çağlar Ş. [Assessment for efficacy of vertebroplasty and kyphoplasty in the treatment of painful osteoporotıc vertebral compression fractures in elderly patients]. Türk Geriatri Dergisi. 2005;8(1):5-6. [Article in Turkish]
• 3. Kiraz İ, Dağtekin A. [Vertebroplasty / Kyphoplasty for Osteoporotic Vertebra Fractures - Advantages / Disadvantages]. Türk Nöroşir Derg. 2020;30(3):516-520. [Article in Turkish]
• 4. Lieberman IH, Dudeney S, Reinhardt MK, Bell G. Initial outcome and efficacy of "kyphoplasty" in the treatment of painful osteoporotic vertebral compression fractures. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2001;26(14):1631-1638. doi: 10.1097/00007632-200107150-00026.
• 5. Yilmaz A, Çakir M, Yücetaş CŞ, Urfali B, Üçler N, Altaş M, Aras M, Serarslan Y, Koç RK. Percutaneous Kyphoplasty: Is Bilateral Approach Necessary? Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2018;43(14):977-983. doi: 10.1097/BRS.0000000000002531
• 6. Chen L, Yang H, Tang T. Unilateral versus bilateral balloon kyphoplasty for multilevel osteoporotic vertebral compression fractures: a prospective study. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2011;36(7):534-540. doi: 10.1097/BRS.0b013e3181f99d70.
• 7. Meral M, Orunoğlu M, Biçer E, Berkyürek E, Koç RK. Osteoporotic Vertebral Fracture; Comparative Analysis of Unilateral and Bilateral Vertebroplasty Results. J Turk Spinal Surg. 2024;35(1):38-42. doi: 10.4274/jtss.galenos.2024.74046.
• 8. Tan Y, Liu J, Li X, et al. Multilevel unilateral versus bilateral pedicular percutaneous vertebroplasty for osteoporotic vertebral compression fractures. Front Surg. 2023;9:1051626. doi: 10.3389/fsurg.2022.1051626.
• 9. Herring JA. ed., Tachdjian's Pediatric Orthopaedics: From the Texas Scottish Rite Hospital for Children. 6th ed., Philadelphia: Elsevier; 2022: pp. 213-299.
• 10. Ma Q, Lin H, Wang L, Zhao L, Chen M, Wang S, et al. Correlation between spinal coronal balance and static baropodometry in children with adolescent idiopathic scoliosis. Gait Posture. 2020;75:93-97. doi: 10.1016/j.gaitpost.2019.10.003.
• 11. Klazen CA, Lohle PN, de Vries J, et al. Vertebroplasty versus conservative treatment in acute osteoporotic vertebral compression fractures (Vertos II): an open-label randomized trial. Lancet. 2010;376(9746):1085-1092. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(10)60954-3.
• 12. Steinmann J, Tingey CT, Cruz G, Dai Q. Biomechanical comparison of unipedicular versus bipedicular kyphoplasty. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2005;30(2):201-205. doi: 10.1097/01.brs.0000150831.46856.87.
• 13. Tohmeh AG, Mathis JM, Fenton DC, Levine AM, Belkoff SM. Biomechanical efficacy of unipedicular versus bipedicular vertebroplasty for the management of osteoporotic compression fractures. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 1999;24(17):1772-1776. doi: 10.1097/00007632-199909010-00004.
• 14. Chen B, Li Y, Xie D, Yang X, Zheng Z. Comparison of unipedicular and bipedicular kyphoplasty on the stiffness and biomechanical balance of compression fractured vertebrae. Eur Spine J. 2011;20(8):1272-1280. doi: 10.1007/s00586-011-1744-3.
• 15. Liebschner MA, Rosenberg WS, Keaveny TM. Effects of bone cement volume and distribution on vertebral stiffness after vertebroplasty. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2001;26(14):1547-1554. doi: 10.1097/00007632-200107150-00009.
• 16. Li Y, Cui W, Zhou P, Li C, Wen Y, Xiao W. Comparison of a flexible versus rigid bone cement injection system in unilateral percutaneous vertebroplasty. Eur J Med Res. 2020;25(1):36. doi: 10.1186/s40001-020-00436-z.
• 17. Mathis JM. Percutaneous vertebroplasty: complication avoidance and technique optimization. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol. 2003 Sep;24(8):1697-706.
• 18. Lane JI, Maus TP, Wald JT, Thielen KR, Bobra S, Luetmer PH. Intravertebral clefts opacified during vertebroplasty: pathogenesis, technical implications, and prognostic significance. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol. 2002;23(10):1642-6.
• 19. Theodorou DJ. The intravertebral vacuum cleft sign. Radiology. 2001;221(3):787-788. doi: 10.1148/radiol.2213991129.