The DOI matches its Crossref record; 70 of the 70 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Percutaneous vertebroplasty for osteoporotic vertebral compression fracture
Open accessAbstract
BACKGROUND: Percutaneous vertebroplasty is widely used to treat acute and subacute painful osteoporotic vertebral fractures although recent placebo-controlled trials have questioned its value. OBJECTIVES: To synthesise the available evidence regarding the benefits and harms of vertebroplasty for treatment of osteoporotic vertebral fractures. SEARCH METHODS: We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE and EMBASE up to November 2014. We also reviewed reference lists of review articles, trials and trial registries to identify any other potentially relevant trials. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomised and quasi-randomised controlled trials (RCTs) including adults with painful osteoporotic vertebral fractures of any duration and comparing vertebroplasty with placebo (sham), usual care, or any other intervention. As it is least prone to bias, vertebroplasty compared with placebo was the primary comparison. Major outcomes were mean overall pain, disability, disease-specific and overall health-related quality of life, patient-reported treatment success, new symptomatic vertebral fractures and number of other serious adverse events. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: At least two review authors independently selected trials for inclusion, extracted data, performed 'Risk of bias' assessment and assessed the quality of the body of evidence for the main outcomes using GRADE. MAIN RESULTS: Eleven RCTs and one quasi-RCT conducted in various countries were included. Two trials compared vertebroplasty with placebo (209 randomised participants), six compared vertebroplasty with usual care (566 randomised participants) and four compared vertebroplasty with kyphoplasty (545 randomised participants). Trial size varied from 34 to 404 participants, most participants were female, mean age ranged between 63.3 and 80 years, and mean symptom duration varied from a week to more than six months.Both placebo-controlled trials were judged to be at low overall risk of bias while other included trials were generally considered to be at high risk of bias across a range of criteria, most seriously due to lack of participant and study personnel blinding.Compared with placebo, there was moderate quality evidence based upon two trials that vertebroplasty provides no demonstrable benefits with respect to pain, disability, disease-specific or overall quality of life or treatment success. At one month, mean pain (on a scale 0 to 10, higher scores indicate more pain) was 5 points with placebo and 0.7 points better (1.5 better to 0.15 worse) with vertebroplasty, an absolute pain reduction of 7% (15% better to 1.5% worse) and relative reduction of 10% (21% better to 2% worse) (two trials, 201 participants). At one month, mean disability measured by the Roland Morris Disability Questionnaire (scale range 0 to 23, higher scores indicate worse disability) was 13.6 points in the placebo group and 1.1 points better (2.9 better to 0.8 worse) in the vertebroplasty group, absolute improvement in disability 4.8% (12.8% better to 3.3% worse), relative change 6.3% better (17.0% better to 4.4% worse) (two trials, 201 participants).At one month, disease-specific quality of life measured by the QUALEFFO (scale 0 to 100, higher scores indicating worse quality of life) was 2.4 points in the placebo group and 0.40 points worse (4.58 better to 5.38 worse) in the vertebroplasty group, absolute change: 0.4% worse (5% worse to 5% better), relative change 0.7% worse (9% worse to 8% better (based upon one trial, 73 participants). At one month overall quality of life measured by the EQ5D (0 = death to 1 = perfect health, higher scores indicate greater quality of life at one month was 0.27 points in the placebo group and 0.05 points better (0.01 worse to 0.11 better) in the vertebroplasty group, absolute improvement in quality of life 5% (1% worse to 11% better), relative change 18% better (4% worse to 39% better) (two trials, 201 participants). Based upon one trial (78 participants) at one month, 9/40 (or 225 per 1000) people perceived that treatment was successful in the placebo group compared with 12/38 (or 315 per 1000; range 150 to 664) in the vertebroplasty group, RR 1.40 (95% CI 0.67 to 2.95), absolute risk difference 9% more reported success (11% fewer to 29% more); relative change 40% more reported success (33% fewer to 195% more).Based upon moderate quality evidence from three trials (one placebo, two usual care, 281 participants) with up to 12 months follow-up, we are uncertain whether or not vertebroplasty increases the risk of new symptomatic vertebral fractures (28/143 observed in the vertebroplasty group compared with 19/138 in the control group; RR 1.47 (95% CI 0.39 to 5.50).Similary, based upon moderate quality evidence from two placebo-controlled trials (209 participants), we are uncertain about the exact risk of other adverse events (3/106 were observed in the vertebroplasty group compared with 3/103 in the placebo group; RR 1.01 (95% CI 0.21 to 4.85)). Notably, seriou
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Measuring inconsistency in meta-analyses
Higgins, J. P. T., Thompson, S. G., Deeks, J. J., & Altman, D. G. (2003) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.327.7414.557 · Cited by 63,139
(2008) · Cited by 3,790
Vertebral fracture assessment using a semiquantitative technique
Genant, H. K., Wu, C. Y., van Kuijk, C., & Nevitt, M. C. (1993) · Journal of Bone and Mineral Research · doi:10.1002/jbmr.5650080915 · Cited by 3,691
Chapter 9: Analysing Data and Undertaking Meta-Analyses
Deeks, J. J., Higgins, J. P. T., & Altman, D. G. (2008) · Cited by 2,782
Hernlund, E., Svedbom, A., Ivergård, M., Compston, J., Cooper, C., Stenmark, J., McCloskey, E. V., Jönsson, B., & Kanis, J. A. (2013) · Archives of Osteoporosis · doi:10.1007/s11657-013-0136-1 · Cited by 2,675
A Randomized Trial of Vertebroplasty for Osteoporotic Spinal Fractures
Kallmes, D. F., Comstock, B. A., Heagerty, P. J., Turner, J. A., Wilson, D. J., Diamond, T. H., Edwards, R., Gray, L. A., Stout, L., Owen, S., et al. (2009) · New England Journal of Medicine · doi:10.1056/nejmoa0900563 · Cited by 1,439
Self-citationA Randomized Trial of Vertebroplasty for Painful Osteoporotic Vertebral Fractures
Buchbinder, R., Osborne, R. H., Ebeling, P. R., Wark, J. D., Mitchell, P., Wriedt, C., Graves, S., Staples, M. P., & Murphy, B. (2009) · New England Journal of Medicine · doi:10.1056/nejmoa0900429 · Cited by 1,436
Self-citationWalters, S. J., & Brazier, J. E. (2005) · Quality of Life Research · doi:10.1007/s11136-004-7713-0 · Cited by 1,341
Savović, J., Jones, H. E., Altman, D. G., Harris, R. J., Jüni, P., Pildal, J., Als-Nielsen, B., Balk, E. M., Gluud, C., Gluud, L. L., et al. (2012) · Annals of Internal Medicine · doi:10.7326/0003-4819-157-6-201209180-00537 · Cited by 1,049
Long-Term Risk of Osteoporotic Fracture in Malmö
Kanis, J. A., Johnell, O., Oden, A., Sernbo, I., Redlund-Johnell, I., Dawson, A., De Laet, C., & Jonsson, B. (2000) · Osteoporosis International · doi:10.1007/s001980070064 · Cited by 1,027
Cited by
Page, M. J., Moher, D., Bossuyt, P. M., Boutron, I., Hoffmann, T. C., Mulrow, C. D., Shamseer, L., Tetzlaff, J. M., Akl, E. A., Brennan, S. E., et al. (2021) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.n160 · Cited by 13,262
The clinician's guide to prevention and treatment of osteoporosis
LeBoff, M. S., Greenspan, S. L., Insogna, K. L., Lewiecki, E. M., Saag, K. G., Singer, A. J., & Siris, E. S. (2022) · Osteoporosis International · doi:10.1007/s00198-021-05900-y · Cited by 1,487
UK clinical guideline for the prevention and treatment of osteoporosis
Gregson, C. L., Armstrong, D. J., Bowden, J., Cooper, C., Edwards, J., Gittoes, N. J. L., Harvey, N., Kanis, J., Leyland, S., Low, R., et al. (2022) · Archives of Osteoporosis · doi:10.1007/s11657-022-01061-5 · Cited by 593
Nussbaumer-Streit, B., Klerings, I., Dobrescu, A. I., Persad, E., Stevens, A., Garritty, C., Kamel, C., Affengruber, L., King, V. J., & Gartlehner, G. (2020) · Journal of Clinical Epidemiology · doi:10.1016/j.jclinepi.2019.10.011 · Cited by 440
Nussbaumer-Streit, B., Klerings, I., Wagner, G., Heise, T. L., Dobrescu, A. I., Armijo-Olivo, S., Stratil, J. M., Persad, E., Lhachimi, S. K., Van Noord, M. G., et al. (2018) · Journal of Clinical Epidemiology · doi:10.1016/j.jclinepi.2018.05.022 · Cited by 72
Metadata
- Authors
- Buchbinder, R., Golmohammadi, K., Johnston, R. V., Owen, R. J., Homik, J., Jones, A., Dhillon, S. S., Kallmes, D. F., & Lambert, R. G.
- Venue
- Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2015-04-30
- Volume
- 11
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- CD006349-CD006349
- ISSN
- 1361-6137 (ISSN-L)
- 1465-1858
- OpenAlex
- W1635676678
- Cited by
- 279
- References
- 70
- FWCI
- 19.69
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Percutaneous vertebroplasty for osteoporotic vertebral compression fracture. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1002/14651858.cd006349.pub2
- The paper
- Buchbinder, R., Golmohammadi, K., Johnston, R. V., Owen, R. J., Homik, J., Jones, A., Dhillon, S. S., Kallmes, D. F., & Lambert, R. G. (2015). Percutaneous vertebroplasty for osteoporotic vertebral compression fracture. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.cd006349.pub2
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.