The prevalence and medical costs of osteoporotic vertebral compression fractures (OVCFs) are on the rise. However, a concrete evidence-based treatment guideline has not yet been established. Despite that numerous randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were performed, the study design and outcome measurement were heterogeneous, and the results were not unified. The purpose of this review is to compare the results of high level-evidence studies to provide a background for evidence-based OVCF treatment. Many reports showed that vertebroplasty has better clinical outcomes than non-surgical treatment for OVCF, but the results of three double-blinded RCTs with the highest level of evidence did not show a significant difference between vertebroplasty and sham procedure. Whether undergoing surgical or non-surgical treatment, OVCF patient management should be started by managing osteoporosis first. Meanwhile, in the results of RCTs related to the comparison of conservative treatment modalities, the benefit of braces and a specific analgesic prescription protocol was also unclear. The presented results of each clinical trial were generally inconsistent and may not be appropriate in all situations. Any decision by clinicians to apply this evidence must be made considering individual patients and available resources. At present, controversy remains about the best treatment modality for OVCF. Large, multicenter, placebo/sham-controlled trials are needed to address this gap and establish strong evidence-based guidelines.
“Beating osteoARThritis”: Development of a stepped care strategy to optimize utilization and timing of non-surgical treatment modalities for patients with hip or knee osteoarthritis
