Sage Journals: Discover world-class research

Abstract

Study Design

Systematic Review.

Objectives

Infection following vertebral augmentation using Percutaneous vertebroplasty (PV) and percutaneous balloon kyphoplasty (PBK) is an exceedingly rare, but potentially life-threatening complication. This systematic review evaluates the microbiological characteristics, risk factors, treatment strategies and outcomes of these infections.

Methods

PubMed, Scopus, and Mendeley databases (2000-2025) were systematically reviewed. Inclusion criteria involved case cohorts of more than 5 adult patients with infections following PV or PBK. Data on the initial procedure, demographics, infection biomarkers, neurologic status, comorbidities, causative pathogens, treatment protocols, and outcomes were evaluated.

Results

A total of 102 patients from 8 studies were included (mean follow-up: 22.9 months). Most were female (64.7%) with a mean age of 71.0 years (range: 50-95). The mean time interval from the initial procedure to infection diagnosis was 5.2 months (range: 0.03-85.2). The most common pathogen was Mycobacterium tuberculosis (35.3%). The mean infection biomarkers were CRP 36.77 mg/dL (range: 0.05-343), ESR 56.98 mm/h (range: 6-126), and WBC 8.53 cells/mm³ (range: 2.09-22.35). Seven patients (6.1%) were treated conservatively, while 95 patients (93.1%) underwent revision surgery. Outcomes were reported for 89 patients (87%). Final follow-up showed that 34 patients (38%) achieved normal mobility, 22 patients (25%) had assisted mobility (crutches or walker), and 11 patients (12%) required a wheelchair. The mobility status was unclear for 11 patients (12%). The mortality rate was 12.3%. Post-treatment mobility was strongly dependent on preoperative neurologic status (OR = 6.0, P = 0.001).

Conclusions

Post-augmentation spinal infections are rare but serious. Outcomes are strongly influenced by preoperative neurological status, while pathogen type and patient comorbidities have limited prognostic impact.

Keywords

vertebroplasty kyphoplasty vertebral augmentation cement augmentation spinal infection infectious spondylitis

Introduction

Osteoporotic vertebral compression fractures (OVCFs) are the most common fragility fractures and have a significant impact on quality of life in older individuals.¹ Vertebral augmentation procedures include minimally invasive techniques widely utilized as operative management for OVCF.² Percutaneous vertebroplasty (PV), first described by Galibert in 1987, involves percutaneous injection of bone cement, usually polymethylmethacrylate (PMMA), directly into the body of the collapsed vertebra. This aims to alleviate pain and prevent further progression of kyphotic deformity.³ Percutaneous ballon kyphoplasty (PBK), a later modification of vertebroplasty, involves the use of an inflatable balloon tamp within the vertebral body before cement introduction, theoretically offering the advantage of restoring vertebral height and reducing the possibility of cement leakage.^3,4

While both PV and PBK are considered cost-effective, safe procedures in terms of pain reduction and functional improvement, they have been linked to potential complications, such as adjacent vertebral fractures, bleeding, cement leakage, neurologic deficit, allergic reaction to bone cement, cardiovascular collapse, pulmonary embolism and infections.^5-9 The risk of infection following PV or PBK is exceptionally low with an incidence ranging from 0.36 to 0.46%.^10,11 Current literature mostly consists of scarce data from case reports and small series. Nonetheless, these infections may be life-threatening complications and their diagnosis can be challenging, requiring a combination of clinical assessment, imaging modalities and laboratory tests.^12-14 Delayed identification of post-augmentation infections can lead to detrimental consequences, including increased mortality rates.¹³ In addition, treatment strategies remain unclear. The mainstay of treatment involves surgical debridement and stabilization, while some authors advocate stand-alone conservative treatment with antibiotics.^10,11,15,16

The primary objective of this systematic review was to evaluate the clinical outcomes of spinal infection treatment following percutaneous PBK or PV, with specific attention to mortality, mobility, and pain. The secondary objective was to correlate clinical outcomes with patient characteristics such as past medical history (PMH), neurological and functional status, isolated pathogens, and management-related factors, including the type of treatment.

Materials and Methods

Search Strategy

PubMed, Scopus and Mendeley databases were systematically searched from January 2000 to January 2025. The used key terms were “vertebral augmentation procedures”, “cement augmentation”, “vertebroplasty”, “kyphoplasty”, “cementoplasty” and “infection.” This systematic review was registered in PROSPERO and was prepared in accordance with Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) 2020 guidelines.¹⁷ Moreover, the PICOS (population, intervention, comparison, outcome, study type) question format was used to plan the analysis.¹⁸ Thus, prospective or retrospective studies reporting adult patients who developed spinal infection after PV or PBK were included in the analysis. Duplicate records were removed using the Mendeley Reference Manager program. The quality of the studies was assessed by 2 authors using the Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) Critical Appraisal Checklist for Case Series.¹⁹ In case of disparity between the 2 authors during the screening and data extraction process, a third reviewer was consulted in order to achieve consensus.

Inclusion Criteria

1. Adult population. 2. English language. 3. Full text available. 4. Prospective or retrospective cohort studies reporting patients who developed infection after PV or PBK at any time after the initial procedure. 5. Low risk of bias according to JBI Critical Appraisal Checklist for case series (score of at least 7/10 YES responses) 6. Case series of more than 5 patients.

Exclusion Criteria

l. Clinical studies including high energy trauma treated with PV or PBK. 2. Review articles, case reports, technical notes, author opinions and short communication. 3. Experimental in vitro or in vivo studies.

The patients’ demographics, the (American Society of Anesthesiologists) ASA score, the initial operative procedure (PV or PBK), the microorganism identified, regardless of the isolation method, infection biomarkers (White blood cells- WBC, Erythrocyte Sedimentation Rate- ESR, C-reactive protein- CRP), and the neurological status before and after infection management were recorded. Neurological status was described as normal or abnormal. No grading of the neurologic deficit was performed. The risk factors related to patient PMH (diabetes mellitus, heart disease, cancer, bacteremia, obesity, chronic kidney disease (CKD), chronic respiratory disease, smoking, pulmonary tuberculosis (TB), urinary tract infection (UTI), bacteremia and autoimmune disease), which can potentially affect the clinical outcome, were also recorded.

Statistical Analysis

The overall visual analogue scale for pain (VAS) score and the overall mortality risk were calculated using the random effects model. The heterogeneity between studies was measured by means of the Higgins I² index.²⁰ The correlation of mortality to microorganism and to the type of operative treatment was estimated using the Pearson’s chi-square test. The binary logistic regression model was conducted to investigate the association of mortality to the infection biomarkers (WBC, ESR, CRP), age, ASA score, pre and post-operative neurological status, and PMH risk factors (diabetes mellitus, heart disease, cancer, bacteremia, obesity, chronic kidney disease (CKD), chronic respiratory disease, smoking, pulmonary tuberculosis (TB), urinary tract infection (UTI), bacteremia and autoimmune disease).

The Pearson’s chi-square test was used to investigate the correlation of post-treatment mobility to the preoperative neurologic deficit and to the type of operative treatment. Abnormal mobility was defined as the use of a walker or wheelchair, with the latter category also encompassing patients who were completely non-ambulatory (eg, bedridden). The binary regression model was conducted to evaluate the correlation of post-treatment mobility to the infection markers, patients’ demographics, ASA score and PMH risk factors. The Nagelkerke R square was used to measure the goodness of fit in the logistic regression process. The statistical analysis was performed using the SPSS 28.0 program.

Results

The search initially attributed 1.338 studies. All duplicate records (n = 295) were identified and removed using the Mendeley Reference Manager Program. The “English” filter was applied to the Scopus search engine, and as a result, 95 papers were excluded automatically. Nine hundred fifty articles were excluded by title and abstract leaving 56 articles. Of those, 8 studies were compatible with the eligibility criteria including 102 patients in total and they were used for the quantitative synthesis (Figure 1).^{10,11,13-16,21,22} Table 1 presents the quality assessment for each study using the JBI Critical Appraisal Tool for Case Series. All the included studies demonstrated high methodological quality and were assessed as low risk of bias.

Figure 1.

Prisma 2020 Flow Diagram for the Search Strategy Used to Review Infections Following Vertebral Augmentation Procedures

Table 1.

Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) Critical Appraisal Checklist for Case Series Applied for Our Included Studies

JBI critical appraisal checklist questions	Abdelrahman et al. (2013)	Ha et al. (2013)	Park et al. (2018)	Liao et al. (2018)	Lai et al. (2019)	Hu et al. (2021)	Yuan et al. (2024)	Zhang et al. (2024)
Q1: Were there clear criteria for inclusion in the case series?	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes
Q2: Was the condition measured in a standard, reliable way for all participants included in the case series?	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes
Q3: Were valid methods used for identification of the condition for all participants included in the case series?	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes
Q4: Did the case series have consecutive inclusion of participants?	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes
Q5: Did the case series have complete inclusion of participants?	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes
Q6: Was there clear reporting of the demographics of the participants in the study?	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes
Q7: Was there clear reporting of clinical information of the participants?	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes
Q8: Were the outcomes or follow up results of cases clearly reported?	Yes	No	Yes	Yes	Yes	No	Yes	No
Q9: Was there clear reporting of the presenting site(s)/clinic(s) demographic information?	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes
Q10: Was statistical analysis appropriate?	Not applicable	Not applicable	Not applicable	Not applicable	Not applicable	Yes	Yes	Not applicable
Total YES answers	9/10	8/10	9/10	9/10	9/10	9/10	10/10	8/10
Overall risk of bias	Low	Low	Low	Low	Low	Low	Low	Low

Characteristics of the studies included are summarized in Table 2. Overall, 6 of 8 included studies primarily focused on infections following PV or PBK. The case cohorts presented by Ha et al. and Hu et al. studied the causes of revision surgery after vertebral augmentation in general and they have included cases of infection among other causes that have led to revision surgery.^16,21 Only 1 of 102 patients reported in a study by Abdelrahman et al. received PV for treatment of Non-Hodgkin Lymphoma.¹⁰

Table 2.

Characteristics of the Included Studies

Study	Number of patients	Kyphoplasty (PBK)/Vertebroplasty (PV)- levels	Microorganisms (most common- %)	Treatment of infection (most common- %)
Abdelrahman et al. (2013)	9	5 patients/PBK – 11 levels	S. aureus- 33.3%	Operative- 88.9%
Abdelrahman et al. (2013)	9	4 patients/PV – 94 levels	No organism or undefined- 33.3%	Operative- 88.9%
Ha et al. (2013)	6	1 patients/PBK – 2 levels	S. aureus- 83.3%	Operative- 100%
Ha et al. (2013)	6	5 patients/PV – 5 levels	S. aureus- 83.3%	Operative- 100%
Park et al. (2018)	11	2 patients/PBK – 4 levels	S. aureus- 18.2%	Operative- 100%
Park et al. (2018)	11	9 patients/PV – 11 levels	No organism or undefined- 27.3%	Operative- 100%
Liao et al. (2018)	18	Only PV – 24 levels	M. tuberculosis- 50%	Operative- 100%
Lai et al. (2019)	9	Only PV – 12 levels	M. tuberculosis - 100%	Operative- 100%
Hu et al. (2021)	7	6 patients/PBK – 6 levels	M. tuberculosis - 28.6%	Operative- 100%
Hu et al. (2021)	7	1 patients/PV – 1 level	No organism or undefined- 71.4%	Operative- 100%
Yuan et al. (2024)	33	12 patients/PBK – 25 levels	M. tuberculosis - 45.5%	Operative- 81.8%
Yuan et al. (2024)	33	21 patients/PV – 45 levels	No organism or undefined- 18.2%	Operative- 81.8%
Zhang et al. (2024)	9	2 patients/PBK – 4 levels	S. aureus- 11.1%	Operative- 100%
		7 patients/PV – 8 levels	Staphylococcus epidermitis- 11.1%
		7 patients/PV – 8 levels	No organism or undefined- 77.8%

All studies except one, precisely documented patient demographics.^{10,11,13,14,16,21,22} There were 55 female and 30 male patients. The mean age for patients was 71.01 years (Range: 50-95). Information regarding the time interval from the initial procedure to infection diagnosis was provided in 2 studies only corresponding to 44 patients.^11,13 However, all studies presented data on the reoperation time point for overall 95 patients that underwent surgical treatment, which presumably reoccurs along with presentation of infection. The mean time to infection diagnosis after the initial surgery was 5.2 months (Range: 0.03-85.2) and the mean time to reoperation was 5.7 months (Range: 0.17-85.3). Twenty-eight patients received PBK and 67 patients PV. All studies reported on the causative microorganisms and the most frequent bacteria identified were M. tuberculosis and S. aureus with a rate of 35.3% and 17.6%, respectively. No organism was identified in 26 patients (25.5%). The method of pathogen isolation was reported in only 3 out of 8 studies, all of which specified the use of tissue culture.^14,15,22 Infection biomarkers were documented in 89 patients across 6 studies. CRP, ESR and WBC were abnormally elevated in 82 (92%), 75 (84%) and 20 patients (22%), respectively. Seven patients (7%) were treated conservatively and 95 (93%) surgically. Among them, 47 (49%) received anterior plus posterior surgery, 10 (11%) anterior only and 38 (40%) posterior only surgery. The mean follow-up time was 22.9 months (Range: 0.5-95 months). Outcome data were reported for 89 out of 102 patients (87%). At the final follow-up 11 patients (12%) died, 11 (12%) needed a wheelchair, 22 (25%) used crutches or a walker for ambulation, and 34 patients (38%) achieved unrestricted mobility. The mobility status was not explicitly reported for 11 patients (12%) (Table 3).

Table 3.

Data Collected From the Included Studies

Number of patients (n)	n = 102
Mean age (range)	71.01 (50-95)
ASA	ASA 1: 1 patient	ASA 2: 16 patients	ASA 3: 33 patients	ASA 4: 5 patients	ASA 5: 0 patients	ASA 6: 1 patient
Initial procedure	Kyphoplasty (28 patients)			Vertebroplasty (67 patients)
Time to infection diagnosis (months) - (range)	5.2 months (0.03-85.2)
Microorganism (most frequent)	M. tuberculosis: 36 patients/35.3%)		Staph aureus: 18 patients/17.6%)		No organism: 26 patients/25.5%)
Neurologic deficit before treatment	No deficit: 53 patients (52%)			Deficit: 36 patients (35.3%)
Fever	Fever: 22 patients (21.6%)			No fever: 53 patients (52%)
Infection biomarkers (mean)-(range)	CRP: 36.77 mg/dl (0.05-343)		ESR: 56.98 mm/h (6-126)		WBC: 8.53 cells/mm³ (2.09-22.35)
Treatment	Conservative: 7 patients	Anterior + posterior: 47 patients		Anterior: 10 patients	Posterior: 38 patients
Time to reoparation (months)-(range)	5.7 months (0.17 – 85.3)
Mean follow up (months)-(range)	22.9 months (0.5 – 96)
Outcome	Death: 11 patients (12.3%)	Wheelchair: 11 patients (12.3%)		Walker: 22 patients (24.7%)	Normal: 34 patients (38.2%)
Mortality	Died: 11 patients (12.3%)			Lived: 78 patients (87.69%)

Reporting on antibiotic treatment was inconsistent. Zhang et al. reported culture-guided intravenous antibiotics for 2 weeks followed by oral antibiotics for 8 weeks, with empirical therapy if cultures were negative.¹⁴ Hu et al. stated that all of their patients received either antibiotics or anti-tuberculous therapy for a long period but did not specify the regimen or duration.¹⁶ Lai et al. mentioned 6 months of anti-tuberculous therapy in all but 1 patient who died, without providing details on the exact protocol.²² Park et al. mentioned antibiotic use in 2 surgically treated patients who were presented in detail. They also noted that conservative treatment included antibiotics, but without offering information regarding the agents or duration. No data were provided for the remaining surgically treated cases.¹¹ The remaining 4 studies did not provide any details on whether antibiotics were administered in their included cases.^10,13,15,21

The pooled mean VAS score was 2.43, 95% Confidence Interval (C.I.: 1.85 – 3.00), I²: 0.75 (75% heterogeneity) (Figure 2). The pooled risk of mortality was 0.123 (12.3%), 95% C.I.: −0.01-0.21.

Figure 2.

Forest Plot of Pooled Mean Postoperative VAS Scores. Squares Represent Mean Scores From Individual Studies With 95% Confidence Intervals, and the Diamond Shows the Overall Pooled Estimate Calculated Using a Random-Effects Model

No statistically significant impact of the identified bacteria to mortality was found (P = 0.36). Four out of ten patients (40%) undergoing anterior surgical approach passed away, while none of the 38 patients who were treated through a posterior approach had such an outcome. Three out of 47 patients (6%) who underwent a combined anterior and posterior approach and 2 of 7 (29%) patients who were treated conservatively died. The difference regarding mortality among the former surgical approaches was statistically significant (P – value: 0.001). The logistic regression model found no significant correlation between ASA score, PMH risk factors, pre or post-operative neurological deficit, nor infection biomarkers, and mortality. The addition of the aforementioned independent variables to the model explained the 79.7% (R square: 0.797) of the variability of the mortality being the dependent variable.

The logistic regression model found no significant correlation between PMH risk factors and infection biomarkers to post treatment mobility. The addition of the aforementioned independent variables to the model explained the 76.2% (R square: 0.762) of the mobility variability as the dependent variable. The post treatment mobility was strongly correlated to neurologic status prior to treatment (P – value: 0.001). The odds ratio (OR) was 6.00 (95% C.I.: 2.0-18.2), meaning the existence of preoperative neurologic deficit markedly increases the risk for post-treatment abnormal mobility by 6 times as opposed to the risk for abnormal mobility when there is no deficit prior to treatment (Figure 3). No difference regarding mobility was found among different types of surgical approaches employed (P – value: 0.477).

Figure 3.

Bar Chart Showing the Association of Post Treatment Mobility to the Neurological Status Before Treatment. Blue Bars Represent Patients Without Neurological Deficit, and Red Bars Represent Patients With a Neurological Deficit; Mobility Outcomes are Categorized as Normal or Abnormal

Discussion

This systematic review represents the most comprehensive synthesis to date of infections following PV and PBK, encompassing 102 patients from 8 studies. The primary findings indicate that although such infections are exceedingly rare, they carry a notable risk of morbidity and mortality.^10,11 The most commonly isolated pathogen was Mycobacterium tuberculosis (35.3%). Surgical intervention, particularly through anterior or combined approaches, was associated with higher mortality (P = 0.001), whereas conservative management was reserved for a small minority. Importantly, preoperative neurological status emerged as the most significant predictor of post-treatment mobility (OR = 6.0, P = 0.001), while infection biomarkers and patient comorbidities did not significantly influence clinical outcomes. These findings underscore the diagnostic challenges, treatment variability, and need for early recognition and individualized surgical decision-making in managing these infections. The time interval between the initial procedure and diagnosis of infection was inconsistently reported, as this information was provided by only 2 studies. The mean time for diagnosis was 5.2 months, with a wide range spanning from 1 day to 7 years, reflecting the variety of clinical scenarios and advocating the required high index of suspicion required for detection of possible infection. Revision surgery was relatively delayed, with a mean of 5.7 months derived from a wide range of timelines matching the mean time to diagnosis of infection. The small subset of patients that were treated conservatively can be potentially attributed to patients being unfit for any surgical intervention.

The etiology of surgical site infection (SSI) after cement augmentation can be classified as: (1) preexistent spondylitis mistakenly diagnosed as a fracture, (2) infection acquired by direct inoculation during surgical procedure, and (3) infection caused by hematogenous spread.¹¹ Amongst all patients, only 3 (2.9%), reported by Hu et al., had infections prior to cement augmentation that was initially misdiagnosed as OVCFs.¹⁶ A literature review conducted by Park et al. reported a misdiagnosis rate of 14.3%, which is substantially higher than the findings of this review.¹¹ However, an early onset infection might be the consequence of cementation in the setting of preexisting infection, especially in cases with tuberculous (TB) spondylitis.^11,15,16 This raises the question of whether routine biopsies should be obtained during the initial procedure, which may identify an occult infection or malignancy. The existing evidence regarding this question remains inconsistent. While Pneumaticos et al. do not support the routine use of transpedicular biopsies, a more recent systematic review by Osterhoff et al. suggests that routine biopsies can be considered, especially when preoperative imaging is absent or inconclusive.^23,24 In the present systematic review, 12 patients (11.7%) were diagnosed with infection within 30 days after the initial operation, suggesting a possible higher prevalence of misinterpreted preexisting infections as OVCFs.

According to the presented data, the most common pathogen was M. tuberculosis with a rate of 35.3% followed by S. aureus, accounting for 17.6% of these infections. No organism was isolated in a major subset of 25%, suggesting diagnostic difficulties and absence of causative antimicrobial treatment in these cases. Regarding the association between mortality and identified pathogens, the current study showed that the isolated bacteria did not have a statistically significant effect on mortality (P-value = 0.36). TB used to be the most common cause of spinal infections a few decades ago.²⁵ Recently, however, the microbiological profile of primary spinal infections has shifted, making pyogenic infections the leading cause. S. aureus is the most common causative microorganism for pyogenic spondylitis and spinal epidural abscess, responsible for up to 80% of reported cases.^25-28 Staphylococcus species are also the most abundantly invading organisms in SSI following both instrumented and non-instrumented spinal procedures.^29,30 However, no consensus exists regarding the leading causative pathogen in SSI following vertebral augmentation procedures. Abdelrahman et al. advocated that S. aureus is the most isolated bacterium.¹⁰ Park et al. reported equal contribution of S. aureus and M. tuberculosis with an incidence of 19% each.¹¹ On the contrary, Yuan et al in the largest case series study to date suggested that M. tuberculosis was the leading cause of post-augmentation infection with a 45.5% rate.¹³ The increased prevalence of M. tuberculosis in the presented results may reflect a plethora of factors. Lai et al. solely included patients with TB spondylitis following PV or PBK; thus, failing to eliminate selection bias in subject inclusion.²² Moreover, the studies that met the eligibility criteria mainly examined country populations with high TB prevalence, such as Taiwan, China and South Korea.^22,31,32 The total sample size including all 102 patients is limited, hindering provision of robust representation of the general trend. Consequently, concluding that M. tuberculosis is the most common cause of infection after PV or PBK is perhaps precarious. Screening for TB prior to cement augmentation procedures may be beneficial in endemic countries. Additionally, ruling out a pre-operative infection that could potentially be misdiagnosed as a fracture is strongly recommended.

Laboratory infection biomarkers, including CRP, ESR and WBC were reported for the majority of patients. ESR and CRP were elevated in 84% and 92% of patients respectively, and serve as supportive tools in the diagnosis of infection. On the other hand, WBC was abnormal in just 22% of the patients, so it is not a reliable biomarker to be used on its own. Despite their use in diagnosis or monitoring, this study demonstrates that infection biomarkers have poor correlation to mortality or mobility.

Individuals with risk factors related to PMH, such as immunosuppression, diabetes mellitus, heart disease, CKD, malignancy or pulmonary TB, have increased susceptibility to spinal infections.^{10,13,16,21,26,33} Nonetheless, the analysis demonstrates that since infection is established, PMH does not significantly influence mortality or mobility.

In contrast to SSI following other spinal procedures, the optimum treatment protocol for infections following PV or PBK has not been standardized.^29,30 Surgical intervention was the preferred management in 93% of the included patients. The chosen surgical approach is still debatable and management of each individual case should be carefully tailored to any given patient. In the cohorts included, anterior column reconstruction with either a 360° approach (47 patients) or a stand-alone anterior approach (10 patients) was most commonly performed. Posterior approach was applied in 38 patients. None of the patients who were operated through posterior approach passed away. Surgical procedures involving anterior column restoration were proven to be related with statistically significant (P – value: 0.001) higher mortality rate. Perhaps patients requiring extensive surgical approaches suffered more destructive infections with severe ramifications. Moreover, the anterior approach is a much more invasive surgical technique with increased operation time and blood loss, so it carries an inherently higher risk of morbidity and mortality.³⁴ The surgical approach did not, according to the present analysis, affect postoperative mobility status. Conservative treatment was chosen for only 7 patients, most likely reflecting selection of individuals with advanced age, frailty, or comorbidities. The relatively high mortality observed in this group (29%) may therefore be related to these baseline characteristics and infection severity, rather than the treatment modality itself. However, the absence of detailed treatment protocols, including antibiotic regimens, and the very small sample size limit the interpretation of this finding.

There was a considerable degree of consistency among studies in the outcome measures, with the majority using mortality, mobility and pain. The mean follow-up was almost 2 years, which is generally adequate, although the broad range varied from 15 days to 8 years. The findings of this systematic review suggest that infections after PV or PBK have a mortality rate of 10.1% which is higher than the overall mortality rate of SSI following spinal surgery which ranges between 1.1% and 7.7%.³⁵ Mortality rates for SSI following minimally invasive spine surgery (MISS) are not well-documented, potentially due to the rarity of these infections. This finding underlines the severity of infections after PV or PBK and could be attributed to the increased patient age or the need for extensive revision surgical procedures.

Pooled mean VAS score was effectively reduced to 2.43 following infection treatment, reflecting a notable improvement in patient-reported pain levels, and suggesting that regardless of the therapeutic approach, successful infection control can lead to notable pain relief. Most of the patients achieved a normal mobility status, followed by patients who used a walker and a wheelchair. Prior neurologic deficit is a strong predictor for post-treatment mobility restriction, as patients with preoperative neurological impairment have a 6-time higher risk of abnormal mobility status, emphasizing the value of early diagnosis and prompt management of these infections.

This study is subject to some limitations. Most case series included were retrospective and had a small sample size. In addition, despite the low risk of bias according to JBI tool, selection and information bias are still considerable in case series studies. Another limitation is the inconsistent reporting of microorganism isolation methods, which restricts detailed analysis of diagnostic pathways and may introduce further reporting bias. Preoperative neurologic status was reported inconsistently and heterogeneously across studies. Some of them noted only presence or absence, others provided descriptive terms (eg, paraparesis, radiculopathy) and only 2 studies documented formal graded scales (ASIA and Frankel). For this reason, we did not attempt to apply a uniform grading system in our analysis. While our results confirm that presence of preoperative neurological deficit is the strongest predictor of postoperative mobility, the variability in reporting and the absence of grading in our statistical analysis should be acknowledged as a limitation. Mobility status before vertebral augmentation and at infection diagnosis was not reported and could only be indirectly inferred from the inconsistently described neurological deficits. Therefore, direct comparison across these time points was not possible. In addition, the included studies provided limited and inconsistent data regarding the type or duration of antibiotic regimens, with several failing to specify whether antibiotics were administered at all. Finally, the interpretation of outcomes should ideally be based on quantitative data such as quality of life and neurological status scores, and in the selected cases, data is incomplete. Nevertheless, this review provides the first structured synthesis of clinical characteristics, treatment strategies, and outcomes for post-augmentation spinal infections, offering valuable guidance for clinical decision-making in this rare but serious complication.

Conclusion

Infections following vertebroplasty or kyphoplasty are rare but serious complications, most commonly caused by Mycobacterium tuberculosis and Staphylococcus aureus, with a significant proportion yielding no identifiable pathogen. Surgical management remains the mainstay of treatment, with anterior or combined approaches linked to higher mortality. Presence of preoperative neurological deficit is the strongest predictor of functional outcome, including mobility status, while patient comorbidities and infection biomarkers show limited prognostic value. Effective infection control was associated with meaningful pain relief, independent of the treatment approach. These findings emphasize the need for early diagnosis, careful patient selection, and standardized outcome reporting in future studies.

Supplemental Material

Supplemental Material - Infection Following Vertebroplasty or Kyphoplasty: A Systematic Review of Risk Factors, Treatment Options and Outcomes

Supplemental Material for Infection Following Vertebroplasty or Kyphoplasty: A Systematic Review of Risk Factors, Treatment Options and Outcomes by Konstantinos Zampetakis, Ioannis M. Stavrakakis, Kosmas Samartzidis, Constantinos Chaniotakis, Christothea-Alexandra Tsiridis, Christos Koutserimpas, Kalliopi Alpantaki, MD, PhD in Global Spine Journal

Footnotes

ORCID iDs

Konstantinos Zampetakis

Constantinos Chaniotakis

Authors’ Contribution

Conceptualization, K.A.; methodology, K.Z, I.M.S. C.C., C.K., and K.A.; statistical analysis, I.M.S; investigation, K.Z., C.C., K.S., C.A.T., and C.K.; data curation, K.Z., C.C., K.S., and C.A.T.; writing—original draft preparation, K.Z., I.M.S., and K.A.; writing—review and editing, C.K. C.A.T.; visualization, K.A. C.K. ;supervision, K.A.; All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

The authors received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Declaration of Conflicting Interests

The authors declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Data Availability Statement

The authors declare that the data supporting the findings of this study are available within the paper and its supplementary information files. This systematic review was registered in Prospero (registration number: CRD42025642112). Available from .

Supplemental Material

Supplemental material for this article is available online.

References

Patel

Liu

Ebraheim

. Managements of osteoporotic vertebral compression fractures: a narrative review. World J Orthop. 2022;13:564-573. doi:10.5312/wjo.v13.i6.564

Long

Yang

. Advances in vertebral augmentation systems for osteoporotic vertebral compression fractures. Pain Res Manag. 2020;2020:3947368. doi:10.1155/2020/3947368

McCall

Cole

Dailey

. Vertebroplasty and kyphoplasty: a comparative review of efficacy and adverse events. Curr Rev Musculoskelet Med. 2008;1:17-23. doi:10.1007/s12178-007-9013-0

Daher

Kreichati

Kharrat

Sebaaly

. Vertebroplasty versus kyphoplasty in the treatment of osteoporotic vertebral compression fractures: a meta-analysis. World Neurosurg. 2023;171:65-71. doi:10.1016/j.wneu.2022.11.123

Hulme

Krebs

Ferguson

Berlemann

. Vertebroplasty and kyphoplasty: a systematic review of 69 clinical studies. Spine. 2006;31:1983-2001. doi:10.1097/01.brs.0000229254.89952.6b

Röllinghoff

Zarghooni

Schlüter-Brust

, et al. Indications and contraindications for vertebroplasty and kyphoplasty. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg. 2010;130:765-774. doi:10.1007/s00402-010-1083-6

Burton

Rhines

Mendel

. Vertebroplasty and kyphoplasty: a comprehensive review. Neurosurg Focus. 2005;18:e1. doi:10.3171/foc.2005.18.3.2

Kim

H-J

Zuckerman

Cerpa

Yeom

Lehman

Lenke

. Incidence and risk factors for complications and mortality after vertebroplasty or kyphoplasty in the osteoporotic vertebral compression fracture-analysis of 1,932 cases from the American college of surgeons national surgical quality improvement. Glob Spine J. 2022;12:1125-1134. doi:10.1177/2192568220976355

Alpantaki

Koutserimpas

Arkoudis

Hadjiapavlou

. Retrograde flow cement leakage during kyphoplasty. Maedica (Bucur). 2022;17:74-79. doi:10.26574/maedica.2022.17.1.74

10.

Abdelrahman

Siam

Shawky

Ezzati

Boehm

. Infection after vertebroplasty or kyphoplasty. A series of nine cases and review of literature. Spine J. 2013;13:1809-1817. doi:10.1016/j.spinee.2013.05.053

11.

Park

Lee

Chang

Kim

. Infection following percutaneous vertebral augmentation with polymethylmethacrylate. Arch Osteoporosis. 2018;13:47. doi:10.1007/s11657-018-0468-y

12.

Shin

Kim

Lee

Joo

. Surgical treatment for delayed pyogenic spondylitis after percutaneous vertebroplasty and kyphoplasty. Report of 4 cases. J Neurosurg Spine. 2008;9:265-272. doi:10.3171/SPI/2008/9/9/265

13.

Yuan

Wang

, et al. Spinal infection after vertebral augmentation: a covert complication with serious havoc. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg. 2024;144:1461-1471. doi:10.1007/s00402-024-05205-9

14.

Zhang

Wang

. Application of piezosurgery in revision surgery through posterior approach for infection after percutaneous vertebral augmentation: technique note with case series. Orthop Surg. 2024;16:1239-1245. doi:10.1111/os.14030

15.

Liao

Lai

Chen

Niu

. Surgical outcomes of infectious spondylitis after vertebroplasty, and comparisons between pyogenic and tuberculosis. BMC Infect Dis. 2018;18:555. doi:10.1186/s12879-018-3486-x

16.

Jiang

Chen

Wang

. Revision surgery after cement augmentation for osteoporotic vertebral fracture. Orthop Traumatol Surg Res. 2021;107:102796. doi:10.1016/j.otsr.2020.102796

17.

Page

McKenzie

Bossuyt

, et al. The PRISMA 2020 statement: an updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews. BMJ. 2021;372:n71. doi:10.1136/bmj.n71

18.

Eriksen

Frandsen

. The impact of patient, intervention, comparison, outcome (PICO) as a search strategy tool on literature search quality: a systematic review. J Med Libr Assoc. 2018;106:420-431. doi:10.5195/jmla.2018.345

19.

Munn

Barker

Moola

, et al. Methodological quality of case series studies: an introduction to the JBI critical appraisal tool. JBI Evid Synth. 2020;18:2127-2133. doi:10.11124/JBISRIR-D-19-00099

20.

Higgins

JPT

Thompson

Deeks

Altman

. Measuring inconsistency in meta-analyses. BMJ. 2003;327:557-560. doi:10.1136/bmj.327.7414.557

21.

Kim

Chang

Son

Kim

. Causes of late revision surgery after bone cement augmentation in osteoporotic vertebral compression fractures. Asian Spine J. 2013;7:294-300. doi:10.4184/asj.2013.7.4.294

22.

Lai

Liao

Chen

Lai

. Tuberculous spondylitis after percutaneous vertebroplasty: a case series of 9 cases. Biomed J. 2019;42:285-292. doi:10.1016/j.bj.2019.04.002

23.

Osterhoff

Scheyerer

Spiegl

UJA

Schnake

. The role of routine transpedicular biopsies during kyphoplasty or vertebroplasty for vertebral compression fractures in the detection of malignant diseases: a systematic review. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg. 2023;143:1887-1893. doi:10.1007/s00402-022-04392-7

24.

Pneumaticos

Chatziioannou

Savvidou

Pilichou

Rontogianni

Korres

. Routine needle biopsy during vertebral augmentation procedures. Is it necessary? Eur Spine J. 2010;19:1894-1898. doi:10.1007/s00586-010-1388-8

25.

Cheung

Luk

KDK

. Pyogenic spondylitis. Int Orthop. 2012;36:397-404. doi:10.1007/s00264-011-1384-6

26.

Lener

Hartmann

Barbagallo

GMV

Certo

Thomé

Tschugg

. Management of spinal infection: a review of the literature. Acta Neurochir. 2018;160:487-496. doi:10.1007/s00701-018-3467-2

27.

Yee

DKH

Samartzis

Wong

Y-W

Luk

KDK

Cheung

KMC

. Infective spondylitis in Southern Chinese: a descriptive and comparative study of ninety-one cases. Spine. 2010;35:635-641. doi:10.1097/BRS.0b013e3181cff4f6

28.

Sato

Yamada

Yokosuka

, et al. Pyogenic spondylitis: clinical features, diagnosis and treatment. Kurume Med J. 2019;65:83-89. doi:10.2739/kurumemedj.MS653001

29.

Chaniotakis

Koutserimpas

Tsantes

, et al. Post-discectomy infection: a critical review and suggestion of a management algorithm. J Clin Med. 2024;13:1478. doi:10.3390/jcm13051478

30.

Alpantaki

Tsioupros

Koutserimpas

Chaniotakis

Hadjipavlou

. Surgical site infections following spinal instrumentation: a review of risk factors and treatment options. J Long Term Eff Med Implants. 2024;35:47-60. doi:10.1615/JLongTermEffMedImplants.2024051157

31.

Kim

Min

Choi

, et al. Prevalence of latent tuberculosis infection among participants of the national LTBI screening program in South Korea - a problem of low coverage rate with current LTBI strategy. Front Public Health. 2022;10:1066269. doi:10.3389/fpubh.2022.1066269

32.

Tang

Zhang

, et al. Extensively drug-resistant tuberculosis, China. Emerg Infect Dis. 2011;17:558-560. doi:10.3201/eid1703.100919

33.

Tsantes

Papadopoulos

Vrioni

, et al. Spinal infections: an update. Microorganisms 2020;8(4):476. doi:10.3390/microorganisms8040476. Published 2020 Mar 27.

34.

Cui

Gong

, et al. Comparison between single anterior and single posterior approaches of debridement interbody fusion and fixation for the treatment of mono-segment lumbar spine tuberculosis. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg. 2022;142:3643-3649. doi:10.1007/s00402-021-03955-4

35.

Patel

Khoury

Girgenti

Welner

. Burden of surgical site infections associated with select spine operations and involvement of Staphylococcus aureus. Surg Infect. 2017;18:461-473. doi:10.1089/sur.2016.186

Supplementary Material

Please find the following supplemental material available below.

For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.

For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.

0.00 MB

0.05 MB

Infection Following Vertebroplasty or Kyphoplasty: A Systematic Review of Risk Factors,Treatment Options and Outcomes

Abstract

Study Design

Objectives

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Keywords

Introduction

Materials and Methods

Search Strategy

Inclusion Criteria

Exclusion Criteria

Statistical Analysis

Results

Discussion

Conclusion

Supplemental Material

Supplemental Material - Infection Following Vertebroplasty or Kyphoplasty: A Systematic Review of Risk Factors, Treatment Options and Outcomes

Footnotes

ORCID iDs

Authors’ Contribution

Funding

Declaration of Conflicting Interests

Data Availability Statement

Supplemental Material

References

Supplementary Material