Background: Several meta-analyses have been performed to compare unilateral percutaneous kyphoplasty (PKP) and bilateral PKP in the treatment of osteoporotic vertebral compression fractures (OVCFs), but inconsistencies in the results have led to questions as to which technique is preferable.
Objective: This study was designed to clarify the benefits and disadvantages of unilateral PKP versus bilateral PKP as found in numerous discordant meta-analyses and thereby present surgical treatment recommendations for OVCFs considering the current best evidence.
Study design: Systematic review/Meta-analysis.
Methods: Meta-analyses on unilateral and bilateral PKP for OVCFs were included by searching Pubmed, Embase, and Cochrane library. Meta-analysis quality was assessed using Oxford Levels of Evidence and Assessment of Multiple Systematic Reviews (AMSTAR). The Jadad decision algorithm was used to identify the best evidence.
Results: Eight eligible meta-analyses were included, 7 of which were Level-II evidence and one was Level-III evidence. The AMSTAR scores varied from 7 to 8. The Jadad decision algorithm suggested that the best meta-analysis should be selected depending upon publication characteristics and methodology of primary studies, language restrictions, and whether data analysis was performed on individual patients. The best available evidence indicated that both unilateral and bilateral PKP could receive similar good clinical and radiological outcomes. However, without increasing the risk of complications, unilateral PKP required shorter surgical time and less cement volume, offering better pain relief and quality of life at post-operative short term follow-ups.
Limitations: Primary studies had defects in their methodologies.
Conclusions: Unilateral PKP appears to be superior to bilateral PKP in the treatment of OVCFs.
Key words: Osteoporotic vertebral compression fractures, percutaneous kyphoplasty, meta-analysis.