Adjacent vertebral body fracture following vertebroplasty with polymethylmethacrylate or calcium phosphate cement: biomechanical evaluation of the cadaveric spine.

STUDY DESIGN: A biomechanical study using human cadaveric thoracolumbar spinal columns. OBJECTIVE: To compare the effect of treatment by vertebroplasty (VP) with polymethylmethacrylate cement and VP with calcium phosphate cement on the creation of adjacent vertebral body fracture following VP. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Adjacent vertebral body fractures have been reported as a complication following VP. METHODS: Twenty-four spinal columns (T10-L2) from human cadavers were subjected to dual energy radiograph absorptiometry to assess bone mineral density. They were divided into the P group and C group, and experimental vertebral compression fractures were created at T12 vertebrae. T12 vertebrae were augmented with polymethylmethacrylate and calcium phosphate cement in the P group and C group, respectively. Each spinal column was compressed until a new fracture occurred at any vertebra, and the location of newly fractured vertebra and failure load was investigated. RESULTS: There was no significant difference in bone mineral density at each level within each group. In the P group, a new fracture occurred at T10 in 2 specimens, T11 in 8, and L1 in 2. In the C group, it occurred at T10 in 1 specimen, T11 in 2, L1 in 1, and T12 (treated vertebra) in 8. The failure loads of the spinal column were 1774.8+/-672.3 N and 1501.2+/-556.5 N in the P group and C group, respectively. There was no significant difference in the failure load of the spinal column between each group. CONCLUSION: New vertebral fractures occurred at the vertebra adjacent to augmented vertebrae in the P group and in the augmented vertebrae in the C group. The difference in the fractured site may be because of the difference in strength between the 2 bone filler materials. Therefore, the strength of bone filler materials is considered a risk factor in developing adjacent vertebral body fractures after VP.

Biomechanical comparison of kyphoplasty with different bone cements.

STUDY DESIGN: Ex vivo biomechanical study. OBJECTIVES: To compare the biomechanical properties of isolated, fractured, osteoporotic vertebral bodies after treatment by kyphoplasty with one of two cements: alpha-tri-calcium phosphate cement (Biopex-R; Mitsubishi Materials Corp., Tokyo, Japan) or polymethylmethacrylate (Simplex P; Stryker-Howmedica-Osteonics, Mahwah, NJ). SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Kyphoplasty and vertebroplasty typically use polymethylmethacrylate cements for the treatment of osteoporotic compression fractures. Scant information exists regarding the use of alternative cements in kyphoplasty. METHODS: Simulated compression fractures were created in 24 vertebral bodies (T6-T9, L2-L5) harvested from three female cadavers. Vertebral bodies were assigned to one of two groups: kyphoplasty with Biopex-R or kyphoplasty with Simplex P. The kyphoplasty treatment consisted of inserting bone tamps bipedicularly into each vertebral body, inflating the tamp, and filling the created void with Biopex-R or Simplex P. Pretreatment and post-treatment heights were measured, and the repaired vertebral bodies were recompressed to determine posttreatment strength and stiffness values. Differences were checked for significance (P < 0.05) using a repeated-measures analysis of variance followed by Tukey's test. RESULTS: Kyphoplasty with Biopex-R restored strength in the lumbar and thoracic vertebral bodies. Kyphoplasty with Simplex P displayed significantly greater posttreatment strength than initial strength in the thoracic region. Vertebral bodies augmented with either cement were significantly less stiff than their initial conditions, except for the thoracic vertebrae treated with Simplex P, in which stiffness was restored. There was no significant difference in percentage of height restored between the cement treatments. CONCLUSIONS: Kyphoplasty with either cement restored initial strength. In general, stiffness was not restored.

Ex vivo measurement of intravertebral pressure during vertebroplasty.

STUDY DESIGN: Ex vivo biomechanical study using cadaver vertebral bodies. OBJECTIVE.: To measure the increase in internal vertebral body pressure from cement injection during vertebroplasty. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Theoretically, the increased force required to inject polymerizing (viscous) cement into a vertebral body during vertebroplasty could produce a concomitant increase in intravertebral pressure and cause additional damage to the vertebral body. An alternative means of reducing intravertebral pressure during injection may be needed. METHODS: We placed 11-gauge cannulas bipedicularly in six vertebral bodies from each of two fresh female cadaver spines (one osteoporotic, one normal). One cannula served as the injection route; a manometer was connected to the other. After immersion of the spines in a saline bath, the vertebral bodies were injected with 10 mL of Simplex P cement by depressing the syringe plunger at a rate of 7 mm/sec using a materials testing machine. Static pressure was measured before and after injection. Peak pressure was measured during injection. Maximum pressure elevation was calculated as peak pressure minus initial static pressure. RESULTS: Maximum pressure elevation averaged (+/-SD) 9.4 +/- 8.5 mm Hg and 6.4 +/- 5.0 mm Hg in the osteoporotic and normal spines, respectively. In all cases (9 of 12) in which the pressure measurement system remained patent (i.e., not occluded by cement), postinjection pressure returned to the initial static pressure. CONCLUSION: The increase in intravertebral body pressure from cement injection during vertebroplasty is minimal. Alternative means of reducing intervertebral pressure before injection may not be needed.

Biomechanical evaluation of kyphoplasty and vertebroplasty with calcium phosphate cement in a simulated osteoporotic compression fracture.

Kyphoplasty and vertebroplasty with polymethylmethacrylate (PMMA) have been used for the treatment of osteoporotic vertebral compression fractures. We performed kyphoplasty and vertebroplasty with alpha-tricalcium phosphate cement (CPC) and PMMA to compare the biomechanical properties. Thirty osteoporotic vertebrae were harvested from nine embalmed cadavers. We randomized the vertebrae into four treatment groups: (1) kyphoplasty with CPC; (2) kyphoplasty with PMMA; (3) vertebroplasty with CPC; and (4) vertebroplasty with PMMA. Prior to injecting the cement, all vertebrae were compressed to determine their initial strength and stiffness. They were then recompressed to determine their augmented strength and stiffness. Although the augmented strength was greater than the initial strength in all groups, there was no significant difference between the two bone cements for either kyphoplasty or vertebroplasty. The augmented stiffness was significantly less than the initial stiffness in the kyphoplasty groups, but the difference between the two cements did not reach significance. In the vertebroplasty groups, the augmented stiffness was not significantly different from the initial stiffness. There was no significant difference between the two bone cements for either procedure when cement volume and restoration of anterior height were assessed. We concluded that kyphoplasty and vertebroplasty with CPC were viable treatment alternatives to PMMA for osteoporotic vertebral compression fractures.