8
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Balloon kyphoplasty in malignant spinal fractures: a systematic review and meta-analysis

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Background

          Spinal fractures are a common source of morbidity in cancer patients. Balloon Kyphoplasty (BKP) is a minimally invasive procedure designed to stabilize fractures and correct vertebral deformities. We performed a meta-analysis to determine the efficacy and safety of BKP for spinal fractures in cancer patients.

          Methods

          We searched several electronic databases up to September 2008 and the reference lists of relevant publications for studies reporting on BKP in patients with spinal fractures secondary to osteolytic metastasis and multiple myeloma. Outcomes sought included pain relief, functional capacity, quality of life, vertebral height, kyphotic angle and adverse events. Studies were assessed for methodological bias, and estimates of effect were calculated using a random-effects model. Potential reasons for heterogeneity were explored.

          Results

          The literature search revealed seven relevant studies published from 2003 to 2008, none of which were randomized trials. Analysis of those studies indicated that BKP resulted in less pain and better functional outcomes, and that these effects were maintained up to 2 years post-procedure. While BKP also improved early vertebral height loss and spinal deformity, these effects were not long-term. No serious procedure-related complications were described. Clinically asymptomatic cement leakage occurred in 6% of all treated levels, and new vertebral fractures in 10% of patients. While there is a lack of studies comparing BKP to other interventions, some data suggested that BKP provided similar pain relief as vertebroplasty and a lower cement leakage rate.

          Conclusion

          It appears that there is level III evidence showing BKP is a well-tolerated, relatively safe and effective technique that provides early pain relief and improved functional outcomes in patients with painful neoplastic spinal fractures. BKP also provided long-term benefits in terms of pain and disability. However, the methodological quality of the original studies prevents definitive conclusions being drawn. Further investigation into the use of BKP for spinal fractures in cancer patients is warranted.

          Related collections

          Most cited references45

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: not found
          • Article: not found

          Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions

            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Size is everything--large amounts of information are needed to overcome random effects in estimating direction and magnitude of treatment effects.

            Variability in patients' response to interventions in pain and other clinical settings is large. Many explanations such as trial methods, environment or culture have been proposed, but this paper sets out to show that the main cause of the variability may be random chance, and that if trials are small their estimate of magnitude of effect may be incorrect, simply because of the random play of chance. This is highly relevant to the questions of 'How large do trials have to be for statistical accuracy?' and 'How large do trials have to be for their results to be clinically valid?' The true underlying control event rate (CER) and experimental event rate (EER) were determined from single-dose acute pain analgesic trials in over 5000 patients. Trial group size required to obtain statistically significant and clinically relevant (0.95 probability of number-needed-to-treat within -/+0.5 of its true value) results were computed using these values. Ten thousand trials using these CER and EER values were simulated using varying group sizes to investigate the variation due to random chance alone. Most common analgesics have EERs in the range 0.4-0.6 and CER of about 0.19. With such efficacy, to have a 90% chance of obtaining a statistically significant result in the correct direction requires group sizes in the range 30-60. For clinical relevance nearly 500 patients are required in each group. Only with an extremely effective drug (EER > 0.8) will we be reasonably sure of obtaining a clinically relevant NNT with commonly used group sizes of around 40 patients per treatment arm. The simulated trials showed substantial variation in CER and EER, with the probability of obtaining the correct values improving as group size increased. We contend that much of the variability in control and experimental event rates is due to random chance alone. Single small trials are unlikely to be correct. If we want to be sure of getting correct (clinically relevant) results in clinical trials we must study more patients. Credible estimates of clinical efficacy are only likely to come from large trials or from pooling multiple trials of conventional (small) size.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Vertebroplasty and kyphoplasty: a systematic review of 69 clinical studies.

              Systematic literature review. To evaluate the safety and efficacy of vertebroplasty and kyphoplasty using the data presented in published clinical studies, with respect to patient pain relief, restoration of mobility and vertebral body height, complication rate, and incidence of new adjacent vertebral fractures. Vertebroplasty and kyphoplasty have been gaining popularity for treating vertebral fractures. Current reviews provide an overview of the procedures but are not comprehensive and tend to rely heavily on personal experience. This article aimed to compile all available data and evaluate the clinical outcome of the 2 procedures. This is a systematic review of all the available data presented in peer-reviewed published clinical trials. The methodological quality of included studies was evaluated, and data were collected targeting specific standard measurements. Where possible, a quantitative aggregation of the data was performed. A large proportion of subjects had some pain relief, including 87% with vertebroplasty and 92% with kyphoplasty. Vertebral height restoration was possible using kyphoplasty (average 6.6 degrees ) and for a subset of patients using vertebroplasty (average 6.6 degrees ). Cement leaks occurred for 41% and 9% of treated vertebrae for vertebroplasty and kyphoplasty, respectively. New fractures of adjacent vertebrae occurred for both procedures at rates that are higher than the general osteoporotic population but approximately equivalent to the general osteoporotic population that had a previous vertebral fracture. The problem with stating definitely that vertebroplasty and kyphoplasty are safe and effective procedures is the lack of comparative, blinded, randomized clinical trials. Standardized evaluative methods should be adopted.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                BMC Palliat Care
                BMC Palliative Care
                BioMed Central
                1472-684X
                2009
                9 September 2009
                : 8
                : 12
                Affiliations
                [1 ]Health-Care Technology Assessment Agency, Instituto de Salud Carlos III, Madrid, Spain
                Article
                1472-684X-8-12
                10.1186/1472-684X-8-12
                2746801
                19740423
                a78c2ab7-d839-417a-bc24-acc7ca4784b8
                Copyright © 2009 Bouza et al; licensee BioMed Central Ltd.

                This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

                History
                : 19 February 2009
                : 9 September 2009
                Categories
                Research Article

                Anesthesiology & Pain management
                Anesthesiology & Pain management

                Comments

                Comment on this article