Introduction: History and Early Development

  • John M. Mathis
  • Stephen M. Belkoff
  • Hervé Deramond


For several decades, vertebroplasty has been performed as an open procedure to augment the purchase of pedicle screws for spinal instrumentation1 and to fill voids resulting from tumor resection.2–5 The procedure introduces bone graft or acrylic cement into vertebral bodies to mechanically augment their structural integrity 2–4,6–12 In some cases, however, the risk of an open procedure is not indicated. It was one such case that served as the impetus for the development of percutaneous vertebroplasty (PV). Percutaneous vertebroplasty achieves the benefits of vertebroplasty without the morbidity associated with an open procedure. Vertebral augmentation is accomplished by injecting polymethylmethacrylate (PMMA) cement into a vertebral body via a percutaneously placed cannula. The procedure was first performed in 1984 by Galibert and Deramond in the Department of Radiology of the University Hospital of Amiens, France,13on a woman, aged 54, who had complained of severe cervical pain for several years.


Vertebral Body Pedicle Screw Giant Cell Tumor Spinal Metastasis Percutaneous Vertebroplasty 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Kostuik JP, Errico TJ, Gleason TF. Techniques of internal fixation for degenerative conditions of the lumbar spine. Clin Orthop 1986; 203: 219–231.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Cybulski GR. Methods of surgical stabilization for metastatic disease of the spine. Neurosurgery 1989; 25(2):240–252.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Alleyne CH, Jr, Rodts GE, Jr, Haid RW. Corpectomy and stabilization with methylmethacrylate in patients with metastatic disease of the spine: a technical note. J Spinal Disord 1995; 8(6):439–443.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Sundaresan N, Galicich JH, Lane JM, et al. Treatment of neoplastic epidural cord compression by vertebral body resection and stabilization. J Neurosurg 1985; 63(5):676–684.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Scoville WB, Palmer AH, Samra K, et al. The use of acrylic plastic for vertebral replacement or fixation in metastatic disease of the spine. Technical note. J Neurosurg 1967; 27(3):274–279.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Cortet B, Cotten A, Deprez X, et al. [Value of vertebroplasty combined with surgical decompression in the treatment of aggressive spinal angioma. Apropos of 3 cases.] Rev Rhum Ed Fr 1994; 61(1): 16–22.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Harrington KD. Anterior decompression and stabilization of the spine as a treatment for vertebral collapse and spinal cord compression from metastatic malignancy. Clin Orthop 1988; 233:177–197.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Harrington KD, Sim FH, Enis JE, et al. Methylmethacrylate as an adjunct in internal fixation of pathological fractures. Experience with three hundred and seventy-five cases. J Bone Joint Surg 1976; 58A(8):1047–1055.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Mavian GZ, Okulski CJ. Double fixation of metastatic lesions of the lumbar and cervical vertebral bodies utilizing methylmethacrylate compound: Report of a case and review of a series of cases. J Am Osteopath Assoc 1986; 86(3):153–157.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    O’Donnell RJ, Springfield DS, Motwani HK, et al. Recurrence of giant-cell tumors of the long bones after curettage and packing with cement. J Bone Joint Surg 1994; 76A(12): 1827–1833.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Persson BM, Ekelund L, Lovdahl R, et al. Favourable results of acrylic cementation for giant cell tumors. Acta Orthop Scand 1984; 55(2):209–214.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Knight G. Paraspinal acrylic inlays in the treatment of cervical and lumbar spondylosis and other conditions. Lancet 1959; (ii):147–179.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Galibert P, Deramond H, Rosat P, et al. [Preliminary note on the treatment of vertebral angioma by percutaneous acrylic vertebroplasty.] Neurochirurgie 1987; 33(2):166–168.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Deramond H, Darrason R, Galibert P. [Percutaneous vertebroplasty with acrylic cement in the treatment of aggressive spinal angiomas.] Rachis 1989; 1(2):143–153.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Darrason R. Place de la vertebroplastie percutanée acrylique dans le traitement des hemangiomes vertebraux agressifs. Doctoral thesis (medicine). Université de Picardie; October 26, 1988.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Lapras C, Mottolese C, Deruty R, et al. [Percutaneous injection of methyl-methacrylate in osteoporosis and severe vertebral osteolysis (Galibert’s technic).] Ann Chir 1989; 43(5):371–376.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Bascoulergue Y, Duquesnel J, Leclercq R, et al. Percutaneous injection of methyl methacrylate in the vertebral body for the treatment of various diseases: percutaneous vertebroplasty [abstract]. Radiology 1988; 169P:372.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Jensen ME, Evans AJ, Mathis JM, et al. Percutaneous polymethylmethacrylate vertebroplasty in the treatment of osteoporotic vertebral body compression fractures: technical aspects. Am J Neuroradiol 1997; 18(10):1897–1904.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Cotten A, Dewatre F, Cortet B, et al. Percutaneous vertebroplasty for osteolytic metastases and myeloma: effects of the percentage of lesion filling and the leakage of methyl methacrylate at clinical follow-up. Radiology 1996; 200(2)525–530.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Kaemmerlen P, Thiesse P, Jonas P, et al. Percutaneous injection of orthopedic cement in metastatic vertebral lesions [letter]. N Engl J Med 1989; 321(2):121.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Kaemmerlen P, Thiesse P, Bouvard H, et al. [Percutaneous vertebroplasty in the treatment of metastases. Technic and results.] J Radiol 1989; 70(10):557–562.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Weill A, Chiras J, Simon JM, et al. Spinal metastases: indications for and results of percutaneous injection of acrylic surgical cement. Radiology 1996; 199(l):241–247.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Melton LJ, III. Epidemiology of spinal osteoporosis. Spine 1997; 22(24 suppl):2S-llS.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Melton LJ, Kan SH, Warmer HW, et al. Lifetime fracture risk: an approach to hip fracture risk assessment based on bone mineral density and age. J Clin Epidemiol 1988; 41(10):985–994.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Kanis JA, Johnell O. The burden of osteoporosis. J Endocrinol Invest 1999; 22(8):583–588.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Miller KK, Klibanski A. Clinical review 106: amenorrheic bone loss. J Clin Endocrinol Metab 1999; 84(6): 1775–1783.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2002

Authors and Affiliations

  • John M. Mathis
  • Stephen M. Belkoff
  • Hervé Deramond

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations