Cargando…
A Nomogram for Predicting the Residual Back Pain after Percutaneous Vertebroplasty for Osteoporotic Vertebral Compression Fractures
OBJECTIVE: Current findings suggest that percutaneous vertebroplasty (PVP) is a suitable therapeutic approach for osteoporotic vertebral compression fractures (OVCFs). However, a significant minority of patients still experience residual back pain after PVP. The present retrospective study was desig...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Hindawi
2021
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8575618/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34760032 http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2021/3624614 |
Sumario: | OBJECTIVE: Current findings suggest that percutaneous vertebroplasty (PVP) is a suitable therapeutic approach for osteoporotic vertebral compression fractures (OVCFs). However, a significant minority of patients still experience residual back pain after PVP. The present retrospective study was designed to determine the risk factors for residual back pain after PVP and provides a nomogram for predicting the residual back pain after PVP. METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed the medical records of patients with single-segment OVCFs who underwent bilateral percutaneous vertebroplasty. Patients were divided into group N and group R according to the postoperative VAS score. Group R is described as the VAS score of residual back pain ≥ 4. Pre- and postoperative factors that may affect back pain relief were evaluated between two groups. Univariate and multivariate logistic regression analysis were performed to identify risk factors affecting residual back pain after PVP. We provided a nomogram for predicting the residual back pain and used the receiver operating characteristic curve (ROC), concordance index (C-index), calibration curve, and decision curve analyses (DCA) to evaluate the prognostic performance. RESULTS: Among 268 patients treated with PVP, 37 (13.81%) patients were classified postoperative residual back pain. The results of the multivariate logistical regression analysis showed that the presence of an intravertebral vacuum cleft (IVC) (OR 3.790, P=0.026), posterior fascia oedema (OR 3.965, P=0.022), severe paraspinal muscle degeneration (OR 5.804, P=0.01; OR 13.767, P < 0.001), and blocky cement distribution (OR 2.225, P=0.041) were independent risk factors for residual back pain after PVP. The AUC value was 0.780, suggesting that the predictive ability was excellent. The prediction nomogram presented good discrimination, with a C-index of 0.774 (0.696∼0.852) and was validated to be 0.752 through bootstrapping validation. The calibration curve of the nomogram demonstrated a good consistency between the probabilities predicted by the nomogram and the actual probabilities. The nomogram showed net benefits in the range from 0.06 to 0.66 in DCA. CONCLUSIONS: The presence of IVC, posterior fascia oedema, blocky cement distribution, and severe paraspinal muscle degeneration were significant risk factors for residual back pain after PVP for OVCFs. Patients with OVCFs after PVP who have these risk factors should be carefully monitored for the possible development of residual back pain. We provide a nomogram for predicting the residual back pain after PVP. |
---|