Treatment of vertebral fractures by compression with implantable intramedullary SpineJack®: first experience in Ecuador
Article Sidebar
Main Article Content
Abstract
Vertebral compression fractures have been treated using bone cement inside them, with techniques such as kyphoplasty and vertebroplasty. However, the potential adverse effects are known, mainly the leakage of cement to the surrounding tissues, and in most cases the consequent affection at vertebral height. It is important that an adequate reduction of the fracture is achieved, since the vertebral height directly influences the quality of life of the patients. In this study, we report the application of SpineJack® expandable intramedullary implant method for the treatment of vertebral compression fractures for the first time in Ecuador. This interesting result is considered, not only for improving the quality of life of the patient, but also for the anatomo-functional point of view of the fractured vertebra. The follow-up of other experiences using this device in Ecuador will allow evaluate it in a more complete way.
Downloads
Article Details
References
Diamond B, Champion W, Clark A. 2003. Management of acute osteoporotic vertebral fractures: a nonrandomized trial comparing percutaneous vertebroplasty with conservative therapy. Am J Med., 114(4): 257-265.
Garzón D, Velasco M, Narváez C. 2012. Modelado de la degradación hidrolítica de un implante óseo. Rev Cuba Inv Biom., 31(2), 318-331.
Hall R, Criddle A, Comito T, Prince R. 1999. A case control study of quality of life and functional impairment in women with long-standing vertebral osteoporotic fracture. Osteoporos Int., 9(6): 508-515.
Krüger A, Oberkircher L, Figiel J, Floßdorf F, Bolzinger F, Noriega D, Ruchholtz S. 2015. Height restoration of osteoporotic vertebral compression fractures using different intravertebral reduction devices: a cadaveric study. The Spine J., 15(5): 1092-1098.
Magerl F, Aebi M, Gertzbein S, Harms J, Nazarian S. 1994. A comprehensive classification of thoracic and lumbar injuries. Eur Spine Journal, 3(4):184-201.
Noriega D, Maestretti G, Renaud C, Francaviglia N, Ould-Slimane M, Queinnec S, Ekkerlein H, Hassel F, Gumpert R, Sabatier P, Huet H, Plasencia M, Theumann N, Kunsky A, Krüger A. 2015. Clinical Performance and Safety of 108 SpineJack® Implantations: 1-Year Results of a Prospective Multicentre Single-Arm Registry Study. Biomed Res Int., article ID 173872, 10 pages. DOI: 10.1155/2015/173872
Papanastassiou I, Phillips F, Van Meirhaeghe J, Berenson J, Andersson G, Chung G, Small B, Aghayev K, Vrionis F. 2012. Comparing effects of kyphoplasty, vertebroplasty, and nonsurgical management in a systematic review of randomized and non-randomized controlled studies. Eur Spine J., 21(9): 1826-1843.
Renaud C. 2015. Treatment of vertebral compression fractures withthecranio-caudal expandable Implant SpineJack®: Technical note and outcomes in 77 consecutive patients. Rev Chirurgie Orthopédique et Traumatologique, 101: 566-568.
Rotter R, Schmitt L, Gierer P, Schmitz K, Noriega D, Mittlmeier T, Meeder P, Martin H. 2015. Minimum cement volumen required in vertebral bodyaugmentation-A biomechanical study comparing the permanent SpineJack® device and balloon kyphoplasty in traumatic fracture. Clin Biomech., 30(7): 720-725.
Velasco M, Garzón D. 2010. Implantes Scaffolds para regeneración ósea.: Materiales, técnicas y modelado mediante sistemas de reacción-difusión. Rev Cuba Inv Biom., 29(1): 140-154