Proponents of kyphoplasty, vertebroplasty square off

Article

After years of backbiting, practitioners of kyphoplasty and vertebroplasty have finally found an issue upon which they can agree. They need a randomized controlled clinical trial.

After years of backbiting, practitioners of kyphoplasty and vertebroplasty have finally found an issue upon which they can agree. They need a randomized controlled clinical trial.

Despite heated exchanges between the two camps and occasional finger-pointing for alleged clinical flops, scientific evidence is lacking that would justify using one technique instead of the other to repair vertebral fractures, said Dr. Avery J. Evans, an interventional neuroradiologist at the University of Virginia Health System. He spoke at a special focus session and panel discussion at the RSNA meeting.

Until recently, only scant clinical literature existed that documented the ability of either technique to treat kyphosis and other vertebral compression fracture symptoms. Promises of therapeutic benefit or height restoration are meaningless without kyphosis reduction, Evans said.

Interventionalists recognize the shortcomings of each technique. For example, patients with tumors who undergo vertebroplasty have higher complication rates. Cement leakages also appear more frequently after this procedure. But physicians cannot establish the success or complication rate of either technique without a randomized controlled trial, he said.

Most available references for these procedures come from in vitro biomechanical data, incidental or anecdotal reports, or retrospective nonrandomized data. Some evidence suggests that increased vertebral pressure following these interventions can cause new vertebral fractures.

While the overall risks of each technique seem similar, the multiple factors influencing success or failure have not been properly addressed, said panelist Dr. David F. Kallmes, an interventional neuroradiologist at the Mayo Clinic in Rochester, MN.

"Until these issues are clearly resolved, we need to have an honest discussion with patients about these procedures," he said. "We also need to make sure we do our best to manage the disease, not just the symptoms. We definitely need a trial."

Several groups in the U.S. and Canada have created protocols for prospective studies. The first multicenter randomized controlled trial with a significant patient population is expected to be announced next year.

For more online information, visit Diagnostic Imaging's RSNA Webcast.

Newsletter

Stay at the forefront of radiology with the Diagnostic Imaging newsletter, delivering the latest news, clinical insights, and imaging advancements for today’s radiologists.

Recent Videos
SNMMI: Emerging PET Insights on Neuroinflammation with Progressive Apraxia of Speech (PAOS) and Parkinson-Plus Syndrome
Improving Access to Nuclear Imaging: An Interview with SNMMI President Jean-Luc C. Urbain, MD, PhD
SNMMI: 18F-Piflufolastat PSMA PET/CT Offers High PPV for Local PCa Recurrence Regardless of PSA Level
SNMMI: NIH Researcher Discusses Potential of 18F-Fluciclovine for Multiple Myeloma Detection
SNMMI: What Tau PET Findings May Reveal About Modifiable Factors for Alzheimer’s Disease
Emerging Insights on the Use of FES PET for Women with Lobular Breast Cancer
Can Generative AI Reinvent Radiology Reporting?: An Interview with Samir Abboud, MD
Mammography Study Reveals Over Sixfold Higher Risk of Advanced Cancer Presentation with Symptom-Detected Cancers
Combining Advances in Computed Tomography Angiography with AI to Enhance Preventive Care
Study: MRI-Based AI Enhances Detection of Seminal Vesicle Invasion in Prostate Cancer
Related Content
© 2025 MJH Life Sciences

All rights reserved.