Evidence Hub

Risk factors for subsequent vertebral fractures after percutaneous vertebral augmentation in Asian populations: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Weijie Zheng, Jie-Xin Huang, Liang Jin, Qiaoli Zhang, Tianfeng Li, Wanchen Gong, Yuchen Xia, Zhengyi Lin et al.

BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders, 2025

5,673 participants · 5 citations

Abstract

To identify the risk factors for subsequent vertebral fractures after percutaneous vertebral augmentation through the meta-analysis. Articles from 2019 to 2024 were retrieved from PubMed, Cochrane Library, Embase, and Web of Science. The quality of included studies was assessed using the Newcastle–Ottawa Scale (NOS), while data analysis was performed with R (The R Project for Statistical Computing). Fourteen articles comprising data from 5,673 patients were included in the analysis. Statistically significant differences were identified for age, gender, T-score (measured by dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry), body mass index (BMI), Computed tomography Hounsfield unit (CT HU) value, intravertebral cleft (IVC), multi-segment vertebral fractures, and bone cement leakage. In contrast, no statistically significant differences were observed for hypertension history, diabetes history, thoracolumbar vertebral fracture, postoperative Cobb angle, surgical method(percutaneous vertebroplasty/percutaneous kyphoplasty), puncture method (unilateral/bilateral puncture), or bone cement volume. In Asian populations, advanced age, female, low T-score, low BMI, low CT HU values, presence of IVC, multi-segment vertebral fractures, and bone cement leakage are identified as significant risk factors for subsequent vertebral fractures following PVA. Conversely, a history of anti-osteoporosis treatment is identified as a protective factor, whereas hypertension history, diabetes history, thoracolumbar…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a meta-analysis. 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: 5,673 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