Skip to main content


Log in

Long-term follow-up of vertebral osteoporotic fractures treated by percutaneous vertebroplasty

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Clinical Rheumatology Aims and scope Submit manuscript


The aim of this study was:to assess the long-term efficacy and safety of percutaneous vertebroplasty (PVP) for treating painful vertebral osteoporotic fractures, and to estimate the risk of vertebral fracture in the vicinity of a cemented vertebra. A prospective open study was conducted. PVP were carried out between July 1995 and September 2000 for 16 patients with symptomatic osteoporotic vertebral fracture that had not responded to extensive conservative medical therapy. All the patients were followed-up for more than 1 year. The efficacy of the PVP was assessed by the changes over time in pain on Huskisson’s visual analog scale (VAS) and on the McGill-Melzack scoring system (MGM). The efficacy of the procedure was also assessed by measuring the changes over time in quality of life assessed by the Nottingham Health Profile (NHP instrument): twenty-one vertebrae treated by PVP in 16 patients were evaluated. The mean duration of follow-up was 35 months. Pain assessed by the VAS significantly decreased from a mean of 71.4 mm±13 before PVP to 36 mm±30 after 6 months, and to 39 mm±33 at the time of maximal follow-up (p<0.05 for both comparisons). The results were also significant for the MGM: 3.00±0.57 before PVP to 1.6±1.4 at the long-term follow-up (p<0.05). The solely statistically significant decrease for quality of life was noted for pain. A slight but not significant improvement was noted for 3/6 dimensions of the NHP scores. A slight but significant increase in social isolation was also found. No severe complication occurred immediately after PVP. At the long term follow-up (35 months) there was a slight but not significantly increased risk of vertebral fracture in the vicinity of a cemented vertebra: odds ratio 3.18 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.51–19.64). The odds ratio of a vertebral fracture in the vicinity of an uncemented fractured vertebra was 2.14 (95% CI: 0.17–26.31). In conclusion, PVP appears to be safe and effective for treating persistent painful osteoporotic fractures. Controlled studies with long-term follow-up are needed to evaluate the risk of vertebral fractures in the vicinity of a cemented vertebra.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4 A

Similar content being viewed by others



McGill-Melzack scoring system


Percutaneous vertebroplasty


Visual analog scale


  1. Cotten A, Boutry N, Cortet B et al. (1998) Percutaneous vertebroplasty: state of the art. Radiographics 18:311–320

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Galibert P, Deramond H, Rosat P et al. (1987) Note préliminaire sur le traitement des angiomes vertébraux par vertébroplastie acrylique percutanée. Neurochirurgie 33:166–168

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Deramond H, Darrasson R, Galibert P (1989) Percutaneous vertebroplasty with acrylic cement in the treatment of aggressive spinal angiomas. Rachis 1:143–153

    Google Scholar 

  4. Cotten A, Duquesnoy B (1997) Vertebroplasty: current data and future potential. Rev Rhum Engl Ed 64:645–649

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Chiras J, Depriester C, Weill A et al. (1997) Vertébroplasties percutanées. Technique et indications. J Neuroradiol 24:45–59

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Jensen ME, Evans AJ, Mathis JM et al. (1997) Percutaneous polymethylmethacrylate vertebroplasty in the treatment of osteoporotic vertebral body compression fractures: technical aspects. AJNR 18:1897–904

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Mathis J, Petri M, Naf N. (1998) Percutaneous vertebroplasty treatment of steroid-induced osteoporotic compression fractures. Arthritis Rheum 41:171–175

    Google Scholar 

  8. Cortet B, Cotten A, Boutry N et al. (1999) Percutaneous vertebroplasty in the treatment of osteoporotic vertebral compression fractures: an open prospective study. J Rheumatol 26:2222–2228

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Hardouin P, Grados F, Cotten A et al. (2001) Should percutaneous vertebroplasty be used to traet osteoporotic fractures? An update. Joint Bone Spine 68:216–221

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Bascoulergue Y, Duquesnel J, Leclercq R et al. (1988) Percutaneous injection of methylmetacrylate in the vertebral body for the treatment of various diseases. Radiology 169:372 (abstract)

    Google Scholar 

  11. Cortet B, Houvenagel E, Puisieux F et al. (1999) Spinal curvatures and quality of life in women with vertebral fractures secondary to osteoporosis. Spine 15:1921–925

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Cortet B, Roches E, Logier R et al. (2002) Evaluation of spinal curvatures after a recent osteoporotic vertebral fracture. Joint Bone Spine 69:201–208

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Weill A, Chiras J, Simon JM et al. (1996) Spinal metastases: indications for and results of percutaneous injection of acrylic surgical cement. Radiology 199:241–247

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Melzack R (1975) The McGill pain questionnaire: major properties and scoring methods. Pain 1:275–279

    Google Scholar 

  15. Hunt S, McEwen J, McKenna S (1985) Measuring health status: a new tool for clinicians and epidemiologists. J Roy Coll Gen Pract 35:185–188

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Genant HK, Wu CY, Van Kuijk C et al. (1993) Vertebral fracture assessment using a semiquantitative technique. J Bone Miner Res 8:1137–1148

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Lapras C, Mottolese R, Deruty R et al. (1989) Injection percutanée de méthyl-méthacrylate dans le traitement de l’ostéoporose et ostéolyse vertébrale grave (technique de P. Galibert). Ann Chir 43:371–376

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Debussche-Depriester C, Deramond H, Fardellone P et al. (1991) Percunaeous vertebroplasty with acrylic cement in the treatment of osteoporotic vertebral crush fracture syndrome. Neuradiology 33:149–152

    Google Scholar 

  19. Gangi A, Kastler BA, Dietemann JL (1994) Percutaneous vertebroplasty guided by a combination of CT and fluoroscopy. AJNR 15:83–86

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Deramond H, Depriester C, Galibert P et al. (1998) Percutaneous vertebroplasty with polymethylmethacrylate. Technique, indications, and results. Radiol Clin North Am 36:533–546

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Martin JB, Jean B, Sugiu K et al. (1999) Vertebroplasty: clinical experience and follow-up results. Bone 25:11S–15S

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Cyteval C, Baron Sarrabère MP, Roux JO et al. (1999) Acute osteoporotic vertebral collapse: open study on percutaneous injection of acrylic surgical cement in 20 patients. AJR 173:1685–1690

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  23. Heini PF, Walchli B, Berlemann U (2000) Percutaneous transpedicular vertebroplasty with PMMA: operative technique and early results. A prospective study for the treatment of osteoporotic compression fractures. Eur Spine J 9:445–450

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Grados F, Depriester C, Cayrolle G et al. (2000) Long-term observations of osteoporotic fractures treated by percutaneous vertebroplasty. Rheumatology 39:1410–1414

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Barr JD, Barr MS, Lemley TJ et al. (2000) Percutaneous vertebroplasty for pain relief and spinal stabilization. Spine 25:923–928

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. O’Brien JP, Sims JT, Evans AJ (2000) Vertebroplasty in patients with severe vertebral compression fractures: a technical report. Am J Neuroradiol 21:1555–1558

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Diamond TH, Clark A (2001) Percutaneous vertebroplasty: a novel treatment for acute vertebral fractures. Med J Aust 174:398–400

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Padovani B, Kasriel O, Brunner P et al. (1999) Pulmonary embolism caused by acrylic cement: a rare complication of percutaneous vertebroplasty. AJNR 20:375–377

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  29. Chiras J, Deramond H (1995) Complications des vertébroplasties. In: Saillant G, Laville C, eds. Echec et complications de la chirurgie du rachis: chirurgie de reprise. Paris, Sauramps Medical, pp 149–153

    Google Scholar 

  30. Cotten A, Dewattre F, Cortet B et al. (1996) Percutaneous vertebroplasty for treatment of osteolytic metastases and myeloma: effect of percentage of lesion filling and the leakage of methylmethacrylate at clinical follow-up. Radiology 200:525–530

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Lieberman IH, Dudeney S, Reinhardt MK et al. (2001) Initial outcome and efficacy of kyphoplasty in the treatment of painful osteoporotic vertebral compression fractures. Spine 14:1631–1638

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations


Corresponding author

Correspondence to Bernard Cortet.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Legroux-Gérot, I., Lormeau, C., Boutry, N. et al. Long-term follow-up of vertebral osteoporotic fractures treated by percutaneous vertebroplasty. Clin Rheumatol 23, 310–317 (2004).

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: