ReviewEuropean spine journal : official publication of the European Spine Society, the European Spinal Deformity Society, and the European Section of the Cervical Spine Research Society2026
Cement leakage and post-operative outcomes after lower-versus higher-volume bone cement injection in percutaneous vertebroplasty: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.
Review in European spine journal : official publication of the European Spine Society, the European Spinal Deformity Society, and the European Section of the Cervical Spine Research Society, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeCement leakage is a common and occasionally serious complication of percutaneous vertebroplasty (PVP). We compared cement leakage (primary outcome) and post-operative pain (VAS) and disability (ODI) (secondary outcomes) between trial-defined lower-volume and higher-volume cement injection in osteoporotic vertebral compression fractures.
methodsWe searched PubMed, Embase, Scopus, the Cochrane Library, CNKI and Wanfang from January 2018 to 31 December 2025 (last search date), and included randomized controlled trials (RCTs). Risk of bias was assessed with RoB 2. "Lower-volume" denotes each trial's smaller-volume arm. Reported lower-volume arms ranged from 1.5 to 2.5 mL to < 6 mL, whereas higher-volume arms ranged from 2.6 to 3.5 mL to 7.0 mL or ≥ 6 mL, depending on the trial definition. Risk ratios (RR) for leakage and mean differences (MD) for VAS/ODI were pooled with random-effects models; an exploratory subgroup (lower-arm ≤ vs. > ~ 3.5 mL) was examined, and sensitivity analyses included leave-one-out analysis, exclusion of the single cervical trial, and exclusion of trials with ambiguous volume labels. Differences in VAS/ODI were interpreted against established minimal clinically important difference (MCID) thresholds.
resultsSixteen RCTs were included. Lower-volume injection was associated with a markedly lower risk of cement leakage (RR 0.30, 95% CI 0.22-0.40; I² = 0%), consistent across subgroups (test for interaction P > 0.30) and stable in leave-one-out analysis (RR 0.27-0.31) and on exclusion of the single cervical trial. Post-operative VAS differed negligibly between arms (MD 0.01 points, 95% CI -0.11 to 0.12), as did ODI among the 12 trials that actually measured it (MD -0.04 points, 95% CI -0.52 to 0.44); both were well below accepted MCID thresholds. Four trials did not measure ODI and were excluded from the ODI analysis.
conclusionTrial-defined lower-volume cement injection was associated with a substantially reduced risk of cement leakage, while differences in post-operative pain and disability were negligible and below accepted MCID thresholds. Because no non-inferiority margin was pre-specified, these findings should not be read as statistical non-inferiority. Given the wide variation in volume definitions and procedural detail across trials, the evidence supports an individualized lower-volume strategy rather than a single universally optimal volume.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42400629What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.