Unilateral Versus Bilateral Percutaneous Kyphoplasty for Single-Level Thoracolumbar Osteoporotic Vertebral Compression Fractures: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Why clinicians should know about it

• Picked for Orthopedics and Sports Medicine (top studies of the week, 27 September 2026).
• Picked for Spine Surgery (top studies of the week, 27 September 2026).
• Picked for Surgery (top studies of the week, 27 September 2026).
• Picked for Anatomy (top studies of the week, 27 September 2026): Meta-analysis of kyphoplasty approaches
• Picked for Radiology, Radiation Oncology, Nuclear Medicine, Medical Physics and Imaging (top studies of the week, 27 September 2026): Unilateral vs bilateral kyphoplasty meta‑analysis

Abstract

Background/Objectives: The optimal surgical approach for Percutaneous KyphoPlasty (PKP) in patients with recent single-level Osteoporotic Vertebral Compression Fractures (OVCFs) remains controversial. Most available previous meta-analyses included studies with variable heterogeneity, often mixing unilateral and bilateral MIS approaches, differing surgical techniques, and various fracture patterns, which limited the reliability of their conclusions. This meta-analysis aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of unilateral versus bilateral PKP exclusively in patients with recent single-level OVCFs only. Methods: A systematic review was conducted according to the PRISMA 2020 guidelines. PubMed, Scopus, Cochrane Library, and ScienceDirect were searched for comparative studies published between 2000 and 2025. Randomized Controlled Trials (RCTs), prospective, and retrospective comparative studies comparing unilateral and bilateral PKP for recent single-level OVCFs were included. Clinical and radiological outcomes as well as perioperative complications and safety outcomes were analyzed using random-effects meta-analysis. Predefined subgroup analyses according to study design and sensitivity analyses were performed. Results: Eleven studies involving 1374 patients (705 unilateral and 669 bilateral PKP) met the inclusion criteria. No significant differences were observed between the two surgical approaches regarding short- or long-term pain relief, cement leakage, number of adjacent vertebral fractures, or overall clinical outcomes. Bilateral PKP demonstrated statistically significant, but clinically negligible, advantages in anterior vertebral body height restoration and kyphosis correction. Unilateral PKP required an insignificantly lower cement volume. For operative time, the overall pooled estimate favored unilateral PKP by approximately 10 min but showed extreme heterogeneity (I2 = 98.5%). Importantly, the two RCTs showed no statistically significant between-group difference (MD = +1.2 min, 95% CI -4.5 to +6.8), indicating that the apparent overall effect was largely driven by observational evidence. Similar discrepancies between randomized and retrospective studies were observed for several other outcomes, underscoring the importance of considering study design when interpreting the results. Conclusions: Current evidence does not demonstrate clinically meaningful superiority of either unilateral or bilateral PKP for the treatment of recent single-level OVCFs. Bilateral PKP may provide small advantages in selected radiographic outcomes, whereas unilateral PKP uses modestly less bone cement; however, the relevance of these differences remains clinically uncertain. Surgical approach selection may therefore be individualized according to vertebral morphology, pedicle anatomy, fracture characteristics, surgeon experience, and technical feasibility rather than expectations of superior clinical outcomes. Further adequately powered randomized trials with standardized outcome reporting and long-term follow-up are warranted.

Abstract as published, via PubMed.