Clinical Equivalence of Unilateral and Bilateral Percutaneous Kyphoplasty for Single-Level Fresh Osteoporotic Vertebral Compression Fractures: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

Description

This dataset accompanies the systematic review and meta-analysis entitled "Clinical Equivalence of Unilateral and Bilateral Percutaneous Kyphoplasty for Single-Level Fresh Osteoporotic Vertebral Compression Fractures: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis." The dataset contains all data required to reproduce the quantitative analyses reported in the manuscript. Included files comprise the literature search strategy, PRISMA study selection process, study eligibility assessment, extracted outcome data, risk-of-bias assessments (RoB 2, ROBINS-I and Newcastle–Ottawa Scale), GRADE certainty assessments, and the statistical datasets used for meta-analysis. Extracted data include study characteristics, demographic variables, perioperative parameters, radiological outcomes, functional outcomes, and safety outcomes for unilateral and bilateral percutaneous kyphoplasty in patients with acute single-level osteoporotic vertebral compression fractures. Continuous outcomes were analyzed using mean differences (MD), whereas dichotomous outcomes were analyzed using odds ratios (OR). Random-effects meta-analyses, subgroup analyses according to study design, sensitivity analyses, publication bias assessments, and certainty of evidence (GRADE) evaluations were performed using R (packages meta and metafor). This dataset is intended to facilitate transparency, reproducibility, secondary analyses, methodological verification, and future evidence syntheses.

Steps to reproduce

Retrieve the included studies using the search strategy provided in the manuscript (PubMed, Scopus, Cochrane Library, and ScienceDirect; publications from 2000–2025). Apply the predefined inclusion and exclusion criteria according to the PRISMA 2020 framework. Extract study-level data independently for both treatment groups (unilateral and bilateral PKP), including: sample size, demographic characteristics, perioperative outcomes, radiological outcomes, clinical outcomes, complication rates. Verify data accuracy against the original publications. For continuous outcomes, calculate pooled mean differences (MDs) with 95% confidence intervals. For dichotomous outcomes, calculate pooled odds ratios (ORs) with 95% confidence intervals. Apply a continuity correction of 0.5 for studies with zero events in one treatment arm. Studies with zero events in both treatment arms should be excluded from the pooled odds ratio estimation because they provide no information on the relative treatment effect. Perform random-effects meta-analyses for all outcomes using the statistical approach described in the manuscript. Quantify heterogeneity using Cochran's Q test and the I² statistic. Perform predefined subgroup analyses according to study design (randomized versus non-randomized studies). Conduct sensitivity analyses by excluding influential studies and, where appropriate, by excluding the single prospective non-randomized study. Evaluate publication bias using funnel plots and Egger's regression test when at least ten studies are available. Apply trim-and-fill analyses when asymmetry is detected. Assess methodological quality using: Cochrane Risk of Bias 2, ROBINS-I, Newcastle–Ottawa Scale. Evaluate certainty of evidence for each outcome using the GRADE framework. Compare the reproduced pooled estimates, heterogeneity statistics, subgroup analyses, sensitivity analyses, and GRADE assessments with those reported in the accompanying manuscript.

Institutions

• Patras Olympian Hospital

  West Greece, Pátrai

Categories

Licence