![Sample our Medicine, Dentistry, Nursing & Allied Health journals, sign in here to start your FREE access for 14 days]({"type":"image" , "src" : "/sda/5944/TOC-Subject-Sample-2021-Medicine-Dentistry-Nursing-Allied-Health.jpg"})
Abstract
Objective
The aim of this study was to compare the efficacy of percutaneous vertebroplasty (PVP) and interventional tumor removal (ITR), with PVP alone for malignant vertebral compression fractures and/or spinal metastatic tumor with epidural involvement.
Patients and methods
A total of 124 patients were selected for PVP and ITR (n = 71, group A) and PVP alone (n = 53, group B). A 14 G needle and guide wire were inserted into the vertebral body, followed by sequential dilatation of the tract until the last cannula reached the anterior portion of the pedicle. Tumors were then ablated with a radiofrequency probe. ITR was performed with marrow nucleus rongeurs, and then cement was injected into the extirpated vertebra. Outcomes were collected preoperatively and at 1, 3 and 6 months and every subsequent 6 months.
Results
The rates of pain relief and increased mobility at the last follow-up were higher in group A than those in group B (P < 0.05). There were significant differences in visual analog scale (VAS) score and Oswestry disability index (ODI) score at 1, 3 and 6 months, 1 year and >1 year in group A than in group B (P < 0.05). The rates of paraplegia recovery and vertebral stability in group A were higher than those in group B (P < 0.05).
Conclusion
PVP and ITR proved to be an effective approach for patients with malignant vertebral compression fractures and/or spinal metastatic tumor and provided distinct advantages in pain relief, function recovery and vertebral stability that are comparable to that obtained with PVP alone.
Acknowledgments
This work was supported by the Foundation of Shanghai Municipal Commission of Health and Family Planning (grant number: 201440269).
Disclosure
The authors report no conflicts of interest in this work.