Spine · 2013
Does bone cement in percutaneous vertebroplasty act as a stress riser?
СтатьяПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Aquarius René, van der Zijden Astrid Maria, Homminga Jasper, Verdonschot Nico, Tanck Esther
Аннотация
STUDY DESIGN: An in vitro cadaveric study.
OBJECTIVE: To determine whether percutaneous vertebroplasty (PVP) with a clinically relevant amount of bone cement is capable of causing stress peaks in adjacent-level vertebrae.
SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: It is often suggested that PVP of a primary spinal fracture causes stress peaks in adjacent vertebrae, thereby leading to additional fractures. The in vitro studies that demonstrated this relationship, however, use bigger volumes of bone cement used clinically.
METHODS: Ten fresh-frozen vertebrae were loaded until failure, while registering force and displacement as well as the pressure under the lower endplate. After failure, the vertebrae were augmented with clinically relevant amounts of bone cement and then again loaded until failure. The force, displacement, and pressure under the lower endplate were again registered.
RESULTS: Stress peaks were not related to the location of the injected bone cement. Both failure load and stiffness were significantly lower after augmentation.
CONCLUSION: On the basis of our findings, we conclude that vertebral augmentation with clinically relevant amounts of bone cement does not lead to stress peaks under the endplate. It is therefore unlikely that PVP, in itself, causes detrimental stresses in the adjacent vertebrae, leading to new vertebral fractures.
LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: N/A.
OBJECTIVE: To determine whether percutaneous vertebroplasty (PVP) with a clinically relevant amount of bone cement is capable of causing stress peaks in adjacent-level vertebrae.
SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: It is often suggested that PVP of a primary spinal fracture causes stress peaks in adjacent vertebrae, thereby leading to additional fractures. The in vitro studies that demonstrated this relationship, however, use bigger volumes of bone cement used clinically.
METHODS: Ten fresh-frozen vertebrae were loaded until failure, while registering force and displacement as well as the pressure under the lower endplate. After failure, the vertebrae were augmented with clinically relevant amounts of bone cement and then again loaded until failure. The force, displacement, and pressure under the lower endplate were again registered.
RESULTS: Stress peaks were not related to the location of the injected bone cement. Both failure load and stiffness were significantly lower after augmentation.
CONCLUSION: On the basis of our findings, we conclude that vertebral augmentation with clinically relevant amounts of bone cement does not lead to stress peaks under the endplate. It is therefore unlikely that PVP, in itself, causes detrimental stresses in the adjacent vertebrae, leading to new vertebral fractures.
LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: N/A.