Evidence Hub

Predictors of delayed union after surgical treatment in patients with osteoporotic vertebral compression fractures: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Lyu FF, Xia LR, Deng YF, He R, Sun R

Journal of orthopaedic surgery and research, 2026

2,349 participants · 1 citation

Abstract

Purpose: The factors that predict delayed union in patients undergoing surgical management of osteoporotic vertebral compression fractures (OVCFs) have not been definitively established. This review aimed to comprehensively identify and analyze these factors to inform clinical practice and improve patient outcomes.

Methods: Four English and three Chinese databases were systematically searched from inception to July 1, 2025. Stata 16.0 was utilized for data analysis. Predictors of delayed union reported in two or more studies were combined. Sensitivity analyses were performed to ensure stability and reliability. Egger and Begg's tests were applied to evaluate publication bias.

Results: This review included 14 studies with a total of 2,349 patients and found that the incidence of delayed union after surgical treatment in patients with OVCFs ranged from 7.86 to 50%. Twelve predictors associated with delayed union were included in this meta-analysis. Ten of them had a statistically significant effect on delayed union, covering baseline characteristics, biological and molecular factors, outcome measures, and therapeutic interventions. The most frequently reported predictor was high bone mineral density (OR = 0.173, 95% CI: 0.068 to 0.442, p < 0.001), followed by advanced age (OR = 1.122, 95% CI: 1.046 to 1.203, p < 0.001), combined diabetes (OR = 2.066, 95% CI: 1.697 to 2.514, p < 0.001), Bone Morphogenetic Protein-2/7 (OR = 0.890, 95% CI: 0.792 to 0.999, p = 0.048), and…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a meta-analysis, done in people. Its evidence level is 1 of 5 (Highest · pooled evidence). Pooled evidence from several studies sits at the top of the evidence pyramid. Reported size: 2,349 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free