ADVERTISEMENT
Advertisement
News > Vertebroplasty No Better Than Placebo
Text Size   Plus   Minus   |   Print   |   Email  

New Studies Raise Doubts About the Benefits of Vertebroplasty

Evidence reveals bone cement injection has no benefit over placebo procedure for spinal compression fractures.

By Brenda Goodman

08/05/09 Two new studies have concluded that a common repair for spinal compression fractures in people who have osteoporosis offers no more benefit than a sham injection and may carry serious risks, experts said Wednesday.

The studies, which were published in The New England Journal of Medicine, were the first clinical trials to test a popular and expensive procedure called vertebroplasty against a placebo, and many experts said they were stunned by the results, which showed that patients got equal amounts of modest pain relief whether they got vertebroplasty, where bone cement is pumped into broken vertebrae, or a dummy injection.

David F. Kallmes, MD, an interventional radiologist at the Mayo Clinic in Rochester, Minn., who led one of the studies, said he thought something was wrong with the data when he finally learned the results.

“I just really couldn’t believe it when they told me,” Dr. Kallmes said in an interview. (In double-blinded clinical trials, neither researchers nor patients are allowed to know who is getting the investigational treatment or the placebo.)

Dr. Kallmes said he was relieved to learn that a team of Australian researchers had gotten roughly the same results in a similar study.

“I think both trials show that vertebroplasty is no better than a sham procedure for either improving pain, function or quality of life,” said Rachelle Buchbinder, PhD, a rheumatologist and director of the Department of Clinical Epidemiology at Cabrini Hospital in Malverne, Australia.

“I don’t think there’s any benefit of having a vertebroplasty and there are potential risks, and they haven’t really been fully elucidated to date,” Dr. Buchbinder added.

In her study, which enrolled 78 patients with spine fractures, one participant who received the cement developed a serious bone infection called osteomyelitis.

And previous research has suggested that bone cement may increase the risk for fractures in adjacent vertebrae because it changes the way the spine is able to absorb shock.

Still, other experts said that while they found the studies to be rigorous and well designed, the results were tough to reconcile with personal experience.

 “I have seen patients come into the O.R. in so much pain that they could not walk,” says Scott Boden, MD, director of the Emory Spine Center in Atlanta, who was not involved in either study. “They get the cement and two minutes later they are walking out the door. It’s that fast.”

Such cases have convinced many in the medical community that the procedure works, and Dr. Boden said he believes the procedure may still have benefit for certain kinds of patients, particularly in those who have recent fractures.

During the past six years, the number of vertebroplasty procedures performed in the United States has doubled, according to Medicare data, from 4.3 to 8.9 procedures for every 1,000 persons, though questions and worries about the risks remained. 

And vertebroplasty is expensive. The total cost is usually around $5,000 when the cost of an MRI scan is included.

So in 2002, Dr. Kallmes convinced the National Institute of Arthritis and Musculoskeletal and Skin Diseases, or NIAMS, part of the National Institutes of Health, to give him money to compare vertebroplasty to a placebo.

Researchers rarely test surgical procedures, even minimally-invasive ones, against a placebo because unlike drug studies, where it’s possible to hand out harmless sugar pills, placebo surgeries involve breaking the skin, a move that can be ethically dicey because it opens the door to infections and other kinds of dangerous complications.

Dr. Kallmes also didn’t want to leave patients in pain if they got the dummy injection, so he told all study participants that they could get the other intervention if they had not experienced adequate relief after 30 days. 

He eventually enrolled 131 patients who were randomly assigned to receive either the bone cement or a dummy injection of short-acting painkillers.

Study investigators took great pains to make patients who got the dummy injection believe they were getting the real thing, including opening a container of the bone cement so the distinctive smell, something like nail polish remover, would waft through the air.

And each month, as he submitted his data, he said he half expected someone would call and tell him to cancel the study, something that happens when results show overwhelming benefit, or danger, early on.

But the call never came.

In the final analysis, patients in both the placebo group and the treatment group reported that on a scale from 1 to 10, their pain dropped by an average of about three points after 30 days, whether they got the bone cement or not.

The Australian study, which was very similar, had almost the same results.

 “The placebo effect, I don’t think, can be underestimated,” said Dr. Buchbinder.

“Especially for an invasive procedure, people have a higher expectation that they will benefit. They put themselves on the line if they have to have an invasive procedure, so they really have to buy into it and I think that really heightens the placebo response.”

Dr. Buchbinder said that after the study, she received a visit from a grateful patient who had been flown to the hospital by air ambulance because the fracture in his back was so painful. 

He was enrolled in the study, and after the procedure, his pain was so much better than he was able to drive home.

Curious, Dr. Buchbinder looked up his number to see which treatment he’d gotten. 

He had gotten the placebo.

Whether his own belief was enough to blunt his pain, or whether the fracture may have healed on its own, as many do, is anyone’s guess, Dr. Buchbinder said.

 “Unless you do rigorous studies, no matter how amazing it looks in these instances, I don’t think you actually can know unless you’ve done the studies,” she said.

barbara amdur
25 Feb 2010, 17:15
My arthritis specialist referred me to an orthopedist who specializes in vertebroplasty and kyphoplasty at Hospital for Special Surgery in n.y.c.
My compression fracture is now 4 years old.Is there any point in having 1 of these procedures at this late date?,
Dr William Clark
05 Sep 2009, 01:11
Vertebroplasty is a benevolent technique to remove exquisite pain from acute and subacaute (<6 weeks old) osteoporotic spinal fractures. This patient population (with recent non-healed vertebral fractures was virtually completely excluded from both studies.I was the Australian operator in Kallmes et al and regard the study as meaningless. I have conveyed this to Dr Kallmes. In Sydney the most appropriate patients by-passed the study and had a vertebroplasty. I have also spoken to every IR operator (all 4) in Buchbinder et al.
This article is a rush to judgement on "science based medicine" without applying scientific technique in appraising the studies. Verebroplasty is usually applied (in Australia) to the exquisitely painful subgroup of acute osteoporotic fractures when the pain cannot be adequately controlled by oral medication. These elderly folks find themselves incapacitated and often hospitalized unable to cope. They cannot sleep, find the pain unbearable and can talk of suicide. They may have bowel or cerebral complications from the narcotic medications. Traditionally they had up to 6 weeks in hospital. Now they have 2 days and a vertebroplasty and go home. The technique can only be truly effective on un-united fractures. In this setting it provides internal fixation of the fracture fragments and ameliorates pain. Acute fracture fixation is well recognized to reduce acute fracture pain elsewhere in the skeleton.
Both of these studies have incorrect patient selection with back pain for up to one year. These fractures unite in 6 weeks - to inject them at 6 months defies logic and, of course, can only have placebo effect. Kallmes et al excluded all inpatients from the study due to local logistics. This is the group most likely to benefit. It is unfortunate that the authors did not mention this in the manuscript. Furthermore, 4 weeks medical therapy was mandated prior to the "outpatient" vertebroplasty. Thus. the subacute fracture group has been completely removed from Kallmes et al.
Buchbinder et al could not recruit (aimed to recruit 200) and required 4.4 years in Melbourne, a city of 4 million people to recruit 78 patients. Two of the four hospitals (The Alfred and Monash) dropped out having done 5 vertebroplasty trial patients between them. They were concerned by the ethics of the study. Only 23 patients in Buchbinder et al had pain less than 6 weeks - too few for statistical analysis. 68% of patients were performed in one centre (Cabrini Hospital) by one radiologist who had no input into patient selection. These patients were selected by the principle author who therefore had control over the outcome of the study.
In both studies 70% of patients refused enrolment and were not followed. This alone makes the studies meaningless and makes a mockery of the hallowed concept of sham surgical studies.
What amazes me, a physician who has performed 2,000 vertebroplasties almost exclusively on subacute osteoporotic fractures is the ease with which these second rate studies have been accepted. They have inappropriate patient selection, terrible recruitment and selection bias with the majority not followed.
This is not surprising with Buchbinder et al where the first four authors are physicians who have never performed a single vertebroplasty. The craft group (IR) who practice the procedure were effectively locked out of patient selection.
If the authors apply the same patient selection principles to appendicectomy (right iliac fossa pain for up to one year) then they can collectively prove that appendicectomy also does not work better than a sham.

The VertosII study in Europe has recruited 200 patients with pain less than 6 weeks. The results of this study will be far more meaningful than either of these sham studies for one good reason – appropriate patient selection.
Jerry Crow
15 Aug 2009, 00:07
I received a vetebroplasty in 2004. The pain relief from the local anesthesia was fantastic. It only lasted an hour. The pain relief from the vertebroplasy was not noticeable. Pain relief since then is effected with distraction and drugs.

Leave a Comment

The comment function provides the opportunity to comment on the content above.

General comments or questions to Arthritis Today editors and medical experts can be submitted here. Past medical questions and answers are available here.

Promotion of products and services and other inappropriate comments are prohibited and will be removed. If you spot one of these before we do, please send an alert.

All fields are required but only your name and comment will be displayed. Your e-mail address will not be used for any other purpose.

Name:
Email:
Text:

Have a Question?  Ask our panel of medical experts. Follow Us On Twitter! A Magazine That Can Change Your Life! Form an Arthritis Walk Team Today. Know Your Alternatives Take Control.  Become a Member of the Arthritis Foundation. Become an Advocate.  Make your voice heard on Capitol Hill. Donate to the Arthritis Foundation
ADVERTISEMENT
Advertisement