Cardiovascular and interventional radiology · 2015
Percutaneous Long Bone Cementoplasty for Palliation of Malignant Lesions of the Limbs: A Systematic Review.
СтатьяСистематический обзорНазвание 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.
Cazzato Roberto Luigi, Palussière Jean, Buy Xavier, Denaro Vincenzo, Santini Daniele, Tonini Giuseppe, Grasso Rosario Francesco, Zobel Bruno Beomonte, Poretti Dario, Pedicini Vittorio, Balzarini Luca, Lanza Ezio
Аннотация
PURPOSE: Percutaneous cementoplasty (PC) is rarely applied to long bone tumours, since cement is not considered to be sufficiently resistant to torsional forces. We reviewed the literature to understand the effects of percutaneous long bone cementoplasty (PLBC) in terms of analgesia, limb function and complications.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: This study followed the Cochrane's guidelines for systematic reviews of interventions. Inclusion criteria were (1) prospective/retrospective studies concerning PC; (2) cohort including at least ten patients; (3) at least one patient in the cohort undergoing PLBC; (5) published in English; (6) results not published by the same author more than once.
RESULTS: One thousand five hundred and ninety-eight articles were screened and 13 matched the inclusion criteria covering 196 PLBC patients. Pain improvement was high in 68.2% patients (σ = 0.2) and mild in 27.4% (σ = 0.2). Functional improvement was high in 71.9% patients (σ = 0.1) and mild in 6% (σ = 0.1). Use of PLBC correlated with pain reduction (P < 0.001). Secondary fractures occurred in 16 cases (8%, σ = 2.5); other complications in 2% cases. Percutaneous stabilisation (PS) was coupled with PLBC in 17% of cases without any subsequent fracture. PS was not associated with absence of secondary fracture (P = 0.08).
CONCLUSION: PLBC is safe, offering good pain relief and recovery of impaired limb function. Secondary fractures are uncommon and PS may reduce their occurrence. However, no evidence is currently available to support PS plus PLBC as compared to PLBC alone.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: This study followed the Cochrane's guidelines for systematic reviews of interventions. Inclusion criteria were (1) prospective/retrospective studies concerning PC; (2) cohort including at least ten patients; (3) at least one patient in the cohort undergoing PLBC; (5) published in English; (6) results not published by the same author more than once.
RESULTS: One thousand five hundred and ninety-eight articles were screened and 13 matched the inclusion criteria covering 196 PLBC patients. Pain improvement was high in 68.2% patients (σ = 0.2) and mild in 27.4% (σ = 0.2). Functional improvement was high in 71.9% patients (σ = 0.1) and mild in 6% (σ = 0.1). Use of PLBC correlated with pain reduction (P < 0.001). Secondary fractures occurred in 16 cases (8%, σ = 2.5); other complications in 2% cases. Percutaneous stabilisation (PS) was coupled with PLBC in 17% of cases without any subsequent fracture. PS was not associated with absence of secondary fracture (P = 0.08).
CONCLUSION: PLBC is safe, offering good pain relief and recovery of impaired limb function. Secondary fractures are uncommon and PS may reduce their occurrence. However, no evidence is currently available to support PS plus PLBC as compared to PLBC alone.