nach oben

Erschienen in:

01.10.2013 | Special Report

Safety and effectiveness of percutaneous sacroplasty: a single-centre experience in 58 consecutive patients with tumours or osteoporotic insufficient fractures treated under fluoroscopic guidance

verfasst von: Licia Pacheco Pereira, Frédéric Clarençon, Évelyne Cormier, Michèle Rose, Beatrix Jean, Lise Le Jean, Jacques Chiras

Erschienen in: European Radiology | Ausgabe 10/2013

Einloggen, um Zugang zu erhalten

Abstract

Objective

To report our experience in percutaneous sacroplasty (PSP) for tumours and insufficiency fractures of the sacrum.

Methods

Single-centre retrospective analysis of 58 consecutive patients who underwent 67 PSPs for intractable pain from sacral tumours (84.5 %) or from osteoporotic fractures (15.5 %). The following data were assessed: visual analogue scale (VAS) before and after the procedure for global pain; short-term (1-month) clinical follow-up using a four-grade patient satisfaction scale (worse, unchanged, mild improvement and significant improvement); modification in analgesics consumption; referred short-term walking mobility. Minor and major complications were systematically assessed.

Results

The mean VAS score was 5.3 ± 2.0 in pre-procedure and 1.7 ± 1.8 in post-procedure. At 1-month follow-up, 34/58 (58.5 %) patients experienced a mild improvement; 15/58 (26 %) presented a significant improvement while 4/58 (7 %) and 5/58 (8.5 %) patients had unchanged or worse pain, respectively. Decreased analgesic consumption was observed in 34 % (20/58) of the patients. Eighty percent of patients with walking limitation experienced improvement, 16 % remained unchanged and 4 % were worse. We noted minor complications in 2/58 patients (3.4 %) and major complications in 2/58 patients (3.4 %).

Conclusion

Percutaneous sacroplasty for metastatic and osteoporotic fractures is a safe and effective technique in terms of pain relief and functional outcome.

Key points

• Percutaneous sacroplasty provides pain relief and functional improvement for insufficiency sacral fractures.

• Percutaneous sacroplasty provides pain relief and function improvement for sacral tumours.

• The major complication rate is acceptable (3.4 %), and is higher in sacral tumours.

• Posterior wall/cortical sacral bone disruption is not statistically associated with more complications.

• However, osteolytic tumours seem to be associated with higher risk of complications.

Strub WM, Hoffmann M, Ernst RJ et al (2007) Sacroplasty by CT and fluoroscopic guidance: is the procedure right for your patient? AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 28:38–41PubMedCrossRef

Zhang J, Wu CG, Gu YF et al (2008) Percutaneous sacroplasty for sacral metastatic tumours under fluoroscopic guidance only. Korean J Radiol 9:572–576PubMedCrossRef

Klazen CAH, Lohle PNM, de Vries J et al (2010) Vertebroplasty versus conservative treatment in acute osteoporotic vertebral compression fractures (Vertos II): an open-label randomised trial. Lancet 376:1085–1092PubMedCrossRef

Saliou G, Kocheida EM, Lehmann P et al (2010) Percutaneous vertebroplasty for pain management in malignant fractures of the spine with epidural involvement. Radiology 254:882–890PubMedCrossRef

Mailli L, Filippiadis DK, Brountzos EN et al (2013) Clinical Outcome and Safety of Multilevel Vertebroplasty: Clinical Experience and Results. Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol 36:183–191PubMedCrossRef

Masala S, Mastrangeli R, Petrella MC et al (2009) Percutaneous vertebroplasty in 1,253 levels: results and long-term effectiveness in a single centre. Eur Radiol 19:165–171PubMedCrossRef

Whitlow CT, Mussat-Whitlow BJ, Mattern CWT et al (2007) Sacroplasty versus vertebroplasty: comparable clinical outcomes for the treatment of fracture-related pain. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 28:1266–1270PubMedCrossRef

Trouvin A-P, Alcaix D, Somon T et al (2012) Analgesic effect of sacroplasty in osteoporotic sacral fractures: a study of six cases. Joint Bone Spine 79:500–503PubMedCrossRef

Kang S-S, Kim H-C, Park J-H et al (2009) Three-dimensional C-arm computed tomography-guided sacroplasty for the treatment of sacral body fracture. Spine 34:309–311CrossRef

10.

Naderi S, Ilaslan H, Aslan A et al (2010) Sacroplasty: report of three cases. Turk Neurosurg 20:418–422PubMed

11.

Kang SE, Lee JW, Kim JH et al (2011) Percutaneous sacroplasty with the use of C-arm flat-panel detector CT: technical feasibility and clinical outcome. Skeletal Radiol 40:453–460PubMedCrossRef

12.

Jayaraman MV, Chang H, Ahn SH (2009) An easily identifiable anatomic landmark for fluoroscopically guided sacroplasty: anatomic description and validation with treatment in 13 patients. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 30:1070–1073PubMedCrossRef

13.

Ehrlich GE (2003) Low back pain. Bull World Health Organ 81:671–676PubMed

14.

Katsanos K, Sabharwal T, Adam A (2010) Percutaneous cementoplasty. Semin Intervent Radiol 27:137–147PubMedCrossRef

15.

Riggs BL, Melton LJ 3rd (1995) The worldwide problem of osteoporosis: insights afforded by epidemiology. Bone 17:505S–511SPubMedCrossRef

16.

Quraishi NA, Giannoulis KE, Edwards KL et al (2012) Management of metastatic sacral tumours. Eur Spine J 21:1984–1993PubMedCrossRef

17.

Pascal-Moussellard H, Broc G, Pointillart V et al. Complications of vertebral metastasis surgery. Eur Spine J 7:438–444

18.

Galibert P, Deramond H, Rosat P et al (1987) Preliminary note on the treatment of vertebral angioma by percutaneous acrylic vertebroplasty. Neurochirurgie 33:166–168PubMed

19.

Choi K-M, Song J-H, Ahn S-K et al (2010) Therapeutic considerations of percutaneous sacroplasty for the sacral insufficiency fracture. J Korean Neurosurg Soc 47:58–63PubMedCrossRef

20.

Kayanja M, Tsai E, Yamashita T et al (2006) The Biomechanics of Insufficiency Fractures and Augmentation of the Sacrum. Spine J 6:96SCrossRef

21.

Belkoff SM, Molloy S (2003) Temperature measurement during polymerization of polymethylmethacrylate cement used for vertebroplasty. Spine 28:1555–1559PubMed

22.

Vilmarsson V, Schnabel K, Wikholm G (2010) Osteoporotic sacral fracture—a painful condition, easy to miss. Sacroplasty a new treatment with quick pain relief. Lakartidningen 107:251–254PubMed

23.

Lyders EM, Whitlow CT, Baker MD et al (2010) Imaging and treatment of sacral insufficiency fractures. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 31:201–210PubMedCrossRef

24.

Ehara S (2006) Percutaneous sacroplasty for osteoporotic insufficiency fractures. AJR Am J Roentgenol 186:580, author reply 580–581PubMedCrossRef

25.

Garant M (2002) Sacroplasty: a new treatment for sacral insufficiency fracture. J Vasc Interv Radiol 13:1265–1267PubMedCrossRef

26.

Cho CH, Mathis JM, Ortiz O (2010) Sacral fractures and sacroplasty. Neuroimaging Clin N Am 20:179–186PubMedCrossRef

27.

Frey ME, Depalma MJ, Cifu DX et al (2008) Percutaneous sacroplasty for osteoporotic sacral insufficiency fractures: a prospective, multicenter, observational pilot study. Spine J 8:367–373PubMedCrossRef

28.

Bayley E, Srinivas S, Boszczyk BM (2009) Clinical outcomes of sacroplasty in sacral insufficiency fractures: a review of the literature. Eur Spine J 18:1266–1271PubMedCrossRef

29.

Nebreda C, Vallejo R, Aliaga L et al (2011) Percutaneous sacroplasty and sacroiliac joint cementation under fluoroscopic guidance for lower back pain related to sacral metastatic tumours with sacroiliac joint invasion. Pain Pract 11:564–569PubMedCrossRef

30.

Wee B, Shimal A, Stirling AJ et al (2008) CT-guided sacroplasty in advanced sacral destruction secondary to tumour infiltration. Clin Radiol 63:906–912PubMedCrossRef

31.

Valencia-Anguita J, Juliá-Narváez M, Rodríguez-Burgos F et al (2007) Percutaneous sacroplasty for relieving pain caused by sacral metastases. Neurocirugia (Astur) 18:247–249

32.

Uemura A, Matsusako M, Numaguchi Y et al (2005) Percutaneous sacroplasty for hemorrhagic metastases from hepatocellular carcinoma. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 26:493–495PubMed

33.

Sun G, Jin P, Li M et al. (2011) Three-dimensional C-arm computed tomography reformation combined with fluoroscopic-guided sacroplasty for sacral metastases. Support Care Cancer. Available at: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22081116

34.

Basile A, Tsetis D, Cavalli M et al (2010) Sacroplasty for local or massive localization of multiple myeloma. Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol 33:1270–1277PubMedCrossRef

35.

Kortman K, Ortiz O, Miller T et al (2012) Multicenter study to assess the efficacy and safety of sacroplasty in patients with osteoporotic sacral insufficiency fractures or pathologic sacral lesions. J Neurointervent Surg. doi:10.1136/neurintsurg-2012-010347

36.

Laredo J-D, Hamze B (2005) Complications of percutaneous vertebroplasty and their prevention. Semin Ultrasound CT MRI 26:65–80CrossRef

37.

Brook AL, Mirsky DM, Bello JA (2005) Computerized tomography guided sacroplasty: a practical treatment for sacral insufficiency fracture: case report. Spine 30:E450–E454PubMedCrossRef

38.

Gjertsen O, Schellhorn T, Nakstad PH (2008) Fluoroscopy-guided sacroplasty: special focus on preoperative planning from three-dimensional computed tomography. Acta Radiol 49:1042–1048PubMedCrossRef

Titel: Safety and effectiveness of percutaneous sacroplasty: a single-centre experience in 58 consecutive patients with tumours or osteoporotic insufficient fractures treated under fluoroscopic guidance
verfasst von: Licia Pacheco Pereira
Frédéric Clarençon
Évelyne Cormier
Michèle Rose
Beatrix Jean
Lise Le Jean
Jacques Chiras
Publikationsdatum: 01.10.2013
Verlag: Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Erschienen in: European Radiology / Ausgabe 10/2013
Print ISSN: 0938-7994
Elektronische ISSN: 1432-1084
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-013-2881-3

Update Radiologie

Bestellen Sie unseren Fach-Newsletter und bleiben Sie gut informiert.

Newsletter bestellen

Springer Medizin

Safety and effectiveness of percutaneous sacroplasty: a single-centre experience in 58 consecutive patients with tumours or osteoporotic insufficient fractures treated under fluoroscopic guidance