Initial clinical experience with a novel vertebral augmentation system for treatment of symptomatic vertebral compression fractures: A case series of 26 consecutive patients
© Korovessis et al; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. 2011
Received: 11 February 2011
Accepted: 22 September 2011
Published: 22 September 2011
Minimally invasive vertebral augmentation procedures are widely used to treat vertebral compression fractures although procedural polymethylmethacrylate cement leakage remains common. We report herein our initial experience with a novel vertebral augmentation technique designed to treat symptomatic vertebral osteoporotic fractures and osteolytic metastases with minimal cement extravasation.
Forty-two vertebral fractures were identified in 26 consecutive patients (mean age 74 ± 9 years). All patients were treated with a novel percutaneous vertebral augmentation device (Kiva® VCF Treatment System, Benvenue Medical, Santa Clara, CA, USA). Indications for surgery included recent (≤ 3 months) symptomatic osteoporotic vertebral fracture (n = 34) and pathologic vertebral fractures (e.g. metabolic bone disease, myeloma, metastasis) (n = 8) located between T10 and S1. Patient outcomes were evaluated pre-treatment and at 2- and 6-month follow-up visits. Postoperative cement extravasation was assessed with computed tomography. Patient-reported back pain was quantified using an 11-point numeric scale. Back-specific functional disability was self-reported with the Oswestry Disability Index on a 0 to 100% scale.
No cases of intraoperative hypotension, respiratory disturbance, neurological deterioration, infection, or death were observed. There were 2 (4.8%) levels where anterior cement leakage was visible radiographically in patients with osteolyses. No intracanal leakage was observed. Back pain scores improved 71% (p < 0.001) from pre-treatment to the 6-month follow-up. Back function improved 56% from baseline to 6 months (p < 0.001).
The initial clinical experience with the Kiva® System demonstrated significant improvements in back pain and function with minimal and clinically insignificant procedural cement leakage.
KeywordsFracture Minimally invasive Osteoporosis Vertebral augmentation
Vertebral compression fractures are common injuries with an incidence of 1.4 million each year . Manifestations of fractured vertebrae include severe chronic back pain, disability, and reductions in quality of life [2–7] as well as greater risk for future vertebral fractures . Acute, symptomatic vertebral compression fractures are initially treated with conservative care, which may include bed rest, bracing, analgesic medication, and/or physical rehabilitation and exercise programs. However, vertebral deformity and back pain often persist despite these measures and, therefore, surgery may eventually be required . Minimally invasive vertebral augmentation procedures have been widely used to treat vertebral compression fractures caused by osteoporosis and, less commonly, osteolytic tumors [10–16]. Although the results of these trials are encouraging, procedural polymethylmethacrylate (PMMA) cement leakage remains common with a frequency of 7% to 72% per treated level [10, 17–20]. We report herein our initial experience with a novel vertebral augmentation system designed to treat painful vertebral osteoporotic fractures and osteolytic metastases with minimal cement extravasation.
This single-arm, feasibility trial was conducted at the first author's institution between January 2010 and April 2010. All study procedures were conducted in accordance with the ethical principles stated in the Declaration of Helsinki and this research was approved by the General Hospital "Agios Andreas" (Patras, Greece). Forty-two vertebral augmentation procedures were performed in 26 consecutive patients (mean age 74 ± 9 years; range: 58 to 86 years). Indications for surgery included recent (≤ 3 months) symptomatic osteoporotic vertebral fracture (n = 34) and pathologic vertebral fractures (e.g. metabolic bone disease, myeloma, metastasis) (n = 8) located between T10 and S1. Symptomatic levels were confirmed with x-ray, computed tomography, and/or magnetic resonance imaging.
Patient outcomes were evaluated pre-treatment and at the 2- and 6-month follow-up visits. Patient-reported back pain was quantified using an 11-point (0 to 10) numeric scale. Back-specific functional disability was self-reported with the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) (version 2) on a 0 to 100% scale . Postoperative cement extravasation and device-related adverse events were assessed with computed tomography and plain radiographs.
Data were analyzed using Predictive Analytics Software (v. 18, SPSS, Inc., Chicago, IL). Continuous data were reported as mean ± standard deviation and categorical data were reported as frequencies and percentages. Longitudinal changes in patient outcomes were analyzed with repeated measures analysis of variance.
The Kiva® System is a novel, safe technique for percutaneous vertebral body augmentation in patients with symptomatic osteoporotic fractures and osteolytic metastases. In our initial experience with this device, we demonstrated improvement in back pain and function through 6 months post-treatment with no significant procedural cement extravasation.
The results of this case series are encouraging. The mean reduction in post-operative pain by 6 months was approximately 5.0 units. These findings compare favorably with the findings from four separate meta-analyses of published studies of the clinical effectiveness of balloon kyphoplasty. Specifically, the mean reductions reported in these meta-analyses for post-operative pain severity scores were 5.1 units from Bouza et al. , 5.6 units from Gill et al. , 5.4 units from Taylor et al. , and 4.6 units from Eck et al. .
The effectiveness of vertebral augmentation remains controversial especially since vertebroplasty was reported to have only modest clinical benefit versus sham in two randomized controlled trials [23, 24]. These studies enrolled patients with vertebral fracture ages of less than 1 year. However, recent trials of vertebral augmentation that enrolled patients with more acute fractures (6 weeks to 3 months) have reported positive results [17, 18, 25]. Therefore, the application of vertebral augmentation techniques may be most beneficial when applied soon after fracture, a concept that is in agreement with the initial findings from the current series.
In kyphoplasty and vertebroplasty procedures, PMMA cement may leak laterally to the soft tissues, superiorly or inferiorly into the adjacent disc space, or posteriorly, where it may involve the exiting nerve root or the spinal canal . The Kiva® System, on the other hand, was designed to reduce and stabilize osteoporotic vertebral fractures by deploying a coiled PEEK implant which is then augmented with cement. This technique allows directional cement delivery, which helps to facilitate cement containment. Our first experience with 42 implants confirmed that the Kiva® System was able to control cement leakage with only 2 (7.7%) observed cases, none of which resulted in clinical sequelae. These results compare favorably to cement leakage rates of 7 to 72% reported with kyphoplasty and vertebroplasty [10, 17–20].
Limitations of this feasibility study include lack of a control group, a relatively short follow-up period, and lack of objective measures of vertebral height restoration. Despite these limitations, the initial clinical results of this trial are promising and warrant further study in larger series with longer follow-up periods.
The results from our initial clinical experience with the Kiva® VCF Treatment System demonstrated significant improvements in back pain and function with minimal and clinically insignificant procedural cement leakage.
We thank Mr. Randy Asher for graphical assistance.
- Johnell O, Kanis JA: An estimate of the worldwide prevalence and disability associated with osteoporotic fractures. Osteoporos Int. 2006, 17 (12): 1726-1733. 10.1007/s00198-006-0172-4.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Cook DJ, Guyatt GH, Adachi JD, Clifton J, Griffith LE, Epstein RS, Juniper EF: Quality of life issues in women with vertebral fractures due to osteoporosis. Arthritis Rheum. 1993, 36 (6): 750-756. 10.1002/art.1780360603.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Leech JA, Dulberg C, Kellie S, Pattee L, Gay J: Relationship of lung function to severity of osteoporosis in women. Am Rev Respir Dis. 1990, 141 (1): 68-71.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Schlaich C, Minne HW, Bruckner T, Wagner G, Gebest HJ, Grunze M, Ziegler R, Leidig-Bruckner G: Reduced pulmonary function in patients with spinal osteoporotic fractures. Osteoporos Int. 1998, 8 (3): 261-267. 10.1007/s001980050063.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Silverman SL: The clinical consequences of vertebral compression fracture. Bone. 1992, 13 (Suppl 2): S27-31.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Gold DT: The clinical impact of vertebral fractures: quality of life in women with osteoporosis. Bone. 1996, 18 (3 Suppl): 185S-189S.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Gold DT: The nonskeletal consequences of osteoporotic fractures. Psychologic and social outcomes. Rheum Dis Clin North Am. 2001, 27 (1): 255-262. 10.1016/S0889-857X(05)70197-6.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Lindsay R, Silverman SL, Cooper C, Hanley DA, Barton I, Broy SB, Licata A, Benhamou L, Geusens P, Flowers K: Risk of new vertebral fracture in the year following a fracture. JAMA. 2001, 285 (3): 320-323. 10.1001/jama.285.3.320.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Lyritis GP, Mayasis B, Tsakalakos N, Lambropoulos A, Gazi S, Karachalios T, Tsekoura M, Yiatzides A: The natural history of the osteoporotic vertebral fracture. Clin Rheumatol. 1989, 8 (Suppl 2): 66-69.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Bouza C, Lopez T, Magro A, Navalpotro L, Amate JM: Efficacy and safety of balloon kyphoplasty in the treatment of vertebral compression fractures: a systematic review. Eur Spine J. 2006, 15 (7): 1050-1067. 10.1007/s00586-005-0048-x.View ArticlePubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
- Gangi A, Guth S, Imbert JP, Marin H, Dietemann JL: Percutaneous vertebroplasty: indications, technique, and results. Radiographics. 2003, 23 (2): e10-10.1148/rg.e10.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Hadjipavlou AG, Tzermiadianos MN, Katonis PG, Szpalski M: Percutaneous vertebroplasty and balloon kyphoplasty for the treatment of osteoporotic vertebral compression fractures and osteolytic tumours. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2005, 87 (12): 1595-1604. 10.1302/0301-620X.87B12.16074.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Ledlie JT, Renfro MB: Kyphoplasty treatment of vertebral fractures: 2-year outcomes show sustained benefits. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2006, 31 (1): 57-64. 10.1097/01.brs.0000192687.07392.f1.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
- 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. 10.1097/00007632-200107150-00026.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Majd ME, Farley S, Holt RT: Preliminary outcomes and efficacy of the first 360 consecutive kyphoplasties for the treatment of painful osteoporotic vertebral compression fractures. Spine J. 2005, 5 (3): 244-255. 10.1016/j.spinee.2004.09.013.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Rao RD, Singrakhia MD: Painful osteoporotic vertebral fracture. Pathogenesis, evaluation, and roles of vertebroplasty and kyphoplasty in its management. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2003, 85-A (10): 2010-2022.PubMedGoogle Scholar
- Klazen CA, Lohle PN, de Vries J, Jansen FH, Tielbeek AV, Blonk MC, Venmans A, van Rooij WJ, Schoemaker MC, Juttmann JR: Vertebroplasty versus conservative treatment in acute osteoporotic vertebral compression fractures (Vertos II): an open-label randomised trial. Lancet. 2010, 376 (9746): 1085-1092. 10.1016/S0140-6736(10)60954-3.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Wardlaw D, Cummings SR, Van Meirhaeghe J, Bastian L, Tillman JB, Ranstam J, Eastell R, Shabe P, Talmadge K, Boonen S: Efficacy and safety of balloon kyphoplasty compared with non-surgical care for vertebral compression fracture (FREE): a randomised controlled trial. Lancet. 2009, 373 (9668): 1016-1024. 10.1016/S0140-6736(09)60010-6.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Taylor RS, Fritzell P, Taylor RJ: Balloon kyphoplasty in the management of vertebral compression fractures: an updated systematic review and meta-analysis. Eur Spine J. 2007, 16 (8): 1085-1100. 10.1007/s00586-007-0308-z.View ArticlePubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
- Eck JC, Nachtigall D, Humphreys SC, Hodges SD: Comparison of vertebroplasty and balloon kyphoplasty for treatment of vertebral compression fractures: a meta-analysis of the literature. Spine J. 2008, 8 (3): 488-497. 10.1016/j.spinee.2007.04.004.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Fairbank JC, Pynsent PB: The Oswestry Disability Index. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2000, 25 (22): 2940-2952; discussion 2952. 10.1097/00007632-200011150-00017.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Gill JB, Kuper M, Chin PC, Zhang Y, Schutt R: Comparing pain reduction following kyphoplasty and vertebroplasty for osteoporotic vertebral compression fractures. Pain Physician. 2007, 10 (4): 583-590.PubMedGoogle Scholar
- Buchbinder R, Osborne RH, Ebeling PR, Wark JD, Mitchell P, Wriedt C, Graves S, Staples MP, Murphy B: A randomized trial of vertebroplasty for painful osteoporotic vertebral fractures. N Engl J Med. 2009, 361 (6): 557-568. 10.1056/NEJMoa0900429.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Kallmes DF, Comstock BA, Heagerty PJ, Turner JA, Wilson DJ, Diamond TH, Edwards R, Gray LA, Stout L, Owen S: A randomized trial of vertebroplasty for osteoporotic spinal fractures. N Engl J Med. 2009, 361 (6): 569-579. 10.1056/NEJMoa0900563.View ArticlePubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
- Rousing R, Hansen KL, Andersen MO, Jespersen SM, Thomsen K, Lauritsen JM: Twelve-months follow-up in forty-nine patients with acute/semiacute osteoporotic vertebral fractures treated conservatively or with percutaneous vertebroplasty: a clinical randomized study. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2010, 35 (5): 478-482. 10.1097/BRS.0b013e3181b71bd1.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Mirovsky Y, Anekstein Y, Shalmon E, Blankstein A, Peer A: Intradiscal cement leak following percutaneous vertebroplasty. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2006, 31 (10): 1120-1124. 10.1097/01.brs.0000216461.48751.d6.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
- The pre-publication history for this paper can be accessed here:http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2474/12/206/prepub
This article is published under license to 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.