Abstract
Several meta-analyses have been performed to compare unilateral percutaneous kyphoplasty (PKP) and bilateral PKP in the treatment of osteoporotic vertebral compression fractures (OVCFs), but inconsistencies in the results have led to questions as to which technique is preferable. This study was designed to clarify the benefits and disadvantages of unilateral PKP versus bilateral PKP as found in numerous discordant meta-analyses and thereby present surgical treatment recommendations for OVCFs considering the current best evidence. Systematic review/Meta-analysis. Meta-analyses on unilateral and bilateral PKP for OVCFs were included by searching Pubmed, Embase, and Cochrane library. Meta-analysis quality was assessed using Oxford Levels of Evidence and Assessment of Multiple Systematic Reviews (AMSTAR). The Jadad decision algorithm was used to identify the best evidence. Eight eligible meta-analyses were included, 7 of which were Level-II evidence and one was Level-III evidence. The AMSTAR scores varied from 7 to 8. The Jadad decision algorithm suggested that the best meta-analysis should be selected depending upon publication characteristics and methodology of primary studies, language restrictions, and whether data analysis was performed on individual patients. The best available evidence indicated that both unilateral and bilateral PKP could receive similar good clinical and radiological outcomes. However, without increasing the risk of complications, unilateral PKP required shorter surgical time and less cement volume, offering better pain relief and quality of life at post-operative short term follow-ups. Primary studies had defects in their methodologies. Unilateral PKP appears to be superior to bilateral PKP in the treatment of OVCFs. Osteoporotic vertebral compression fractures, percutaneous kyphoplasty, meta-analysis.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
