medigraphic.com
ISSN 1561-3100 (Print)

2020, Number 2

<< Back Next >>

Revista Cubana de Ortopedia y Traumatología 2020; 34 (2)

Quality of life and sagittal balance in the evolution of patients with multiple myeloma who received treatment with percutaneous vertebroplasty

Jiménez-Ávila JM, Patiño-López JM, García-Rosas LA, González-Cisneros AC

Language: Spanish
References: 20
Page: 1-15
PDF size: 827.44 Kb.


ABSTRACT

Introduction: Multiple myeloma accounts for 1% of neoplasms and for 10% of malignant hematomas. The mean onset age is 65 years. Bone pain in the spine and ribs is its initial manifestation. Surgical treatment for multiple myeloma in the spine consists in wide decompression and arthrodesis. Vertebroplasty is considered the choice technique because it restores sagittal and coronal balance, contributes to the strengthening of the vertebral body, and reduces pain associated with fractures.
Objective: To assess the effect of vertebroplasty on quality of life and the effect of sagittal balance in reducing pain.
Methods: 192 patients with multiple myeloma and spinal fracture were studied, 80 treated with vertebroplasty and 112 treated conservatively. The Oswestry questionnaire and the Karnofsky scale were used.
Results: Vertebroplasty decreased the use of opioid analgesics by 0.52 times.
Conclusions: Vertebroplasty represents a greater benefit for the quality of life of patients suffering from multiple myeloma with vertebral fracture. It affects the improvement of sagittal balance, the level of disability, and the ability to perform daily tasks.


REFERENCES

  1. Gómez-Almaguer D. Guías Mexicanas de diagnóstico y recomendaciones terapéuticas para mieloma múltiple. Hematología. 2010;11(1):40-62.

  2. Croucher PI. Bone disease in multiple myeloma; British Journal of Haematology. 1998;103:902-10.

  3. Rajkumar SV. Multiple Myeloma:2011 update on diagnosis, risk-stratification and Management. American Journal of Hematology. 2011;86:57-65.

  4. Shirley D´Sa, Abildgaard N, Tighe, J, Shaw P, Hall-Craggs M. Guidelines for the use of Imaging in the Management of myeloma, British Journal of Haematology. 2007;137:49-63.

  5. Mahnken AH, Wildberger JE, Gehbauer GT. Multidetector CT of the Spine in Multiple Myeloma; Comparison with MR Imaging and Radiography AJR. 2002;178:1429-36.

  6. Yunfei Zha, Maojin Li, Jianyong Yang. Dynamic Contrast Enhanced Magnetic Resonance Imaging of Diffuse Spinal Bone Marrow Infiltration in Patients with Hematological Malignancies. Korean J Radiol. 2010;11(2):187-94.

  7. Hillengass J, Wasser K, Delorme S. Lumbar Bone Marrow Microcirculation Measurements from Dynamic Contrast-Enhanced Magnetic Resonance Imaging is a Predictor of event-free survival in progressive multiple myeloma, Clinical Cancer Research. 2007;13:475-481.

  8. Rahmouni A, Divine M, Mathieu D, Golli M, Haioun C. MR Appearance of multiple myeloma of the spine before and alter treatment, AJR. 1993;160:1053-1057.

  9. Bonilla Castro C, Durán Pérez EG, Alexanderson Rosas G. Compresión medular como primera manifestación de cáncer metastásico, Medicina Interna de México. 2008;24(4):289-93.

  10. Lecouvert F, Richard F, Vande Berg B, Malghem J, Maldague B, Jamart J, et al. Long term effects of localized spinal radiation therapy on vertebral fractures and focal lesions appearance in patients with multiple myeloma, British Journal of Haematology. 1997;96:743-5.

  11. Avanzi O, Landim E, Meves R, Silver Caffaro MF, Nassar Pellegrino LA. Mieloma múltiple de la columna: evaluación del tratamiento quirúrgico. Coluna/Columna. 2009;8(3):254-9.

  12. de la Torre González DM, Góngora López J, Pérez Meave JA. Mieloma múltiple en la columna vertebral con compromiso neurológico. Rev Hosp Jua Mex. 2005;72(3):103-7.

  13. Terrence H. Diamond, Percutaneous vertebroplasty for acute vertebral body fracture and deformity in multiple myeloma, British Journal of Haematology, 2004;124:485-7.

  14. Kallmes DF, Jensen ME. Percutaneous Vertebroplasty. Radiology. 2003;229:27-36.

  15. Kaufmann TH, Mary E. Jensen ME. Age of Fracture and clinical outcomes of percutaneous vertebroplasty. AJRN Am J Neuroradiol. 2001;22:1860-3.

  16. Bong-Suk L, Ung-Kyu C, Sang-Min Y. Clinical Outcomes alter Percutaneous Vertebroplasty for pathologic compression fractures in osteolytic metastático spinal disease. J Korean Neurosurg. 2009;45:269-374.

  17. Cortet B, Cotten A, Percutaneous vertebroplasty in patients with osteolytic metastases or multiple myeloma. Rhum Eng Ed. 1997;64(3):177-83.

  18. Cagri Kose K, Cebesoy O, Akan B, Altinel L, Dincer D, Yazar T. Functional results of vertebral augmentation techniques in pathological vertebral fractures of myelomatous patients. Journal of the nacional medical association. 2006;98(10):1654-8.

  19. Garlan P, Gishen P, Rahemtulla A. Percutaneous vertebroplasty to treat painful myelomatous vertebral deposits-long-term efficacy outcomes, Ann Hematol. 2011;90(1):95-100.

  20. Yamazaki E, Takemura S, Sakamoto H, Bandai H, Mitsuoka H, Bandoh K, et al. Efficacy of percutaneous vertebroplasty for multiple mieloma, Rinsho Ketsueki. 2007;48(3):2000-3.




2020     |     www.medigraphic.com