Efficacy Study of the Octapolar Lead in Patients With Failed Back Surgery Syndrome (FBSS) With Chronic Pain

November 1, 2013 updated by: Rik Buschman, PhD

Octad Study: Evaluation of the Effectiveness of the Octopolar Lead in Patients With Failed Back Surgery Syndrome With Low Back and/or Leg Pain During a One Year Follow-up Period

Spinal cord stimulation (SCS) has been used for over 40 years to treat neuropathic pain. Various clinical studies have shown a beneficial effect of SCS on pain in patients with Failed Back Surgery Syndrome (FBSS). Since more than 2 years the 8-contact points Octad lead has been used and replaced the 4-contact points Quad lead. Even though it seems that eight electrodes has potential advantage over the four electrodes in case of lead migration or disease progress, no clinical data have been published on the effectiveness of SCS using the octopolar epidural lead. The Octad study intents to assess the effectiveness and technical performance of SCS with the Octad® lead for treatment of chronic pain. This study is not set up as a comparison study between the Octad lead and other SCS leads, such as the Quad lead, because the Octad lead is used in most eligible FBSS patients as the standard of care lead.

The study intends to:

  1. evaluate the effectiveness of SCS with the Octad® lead on chronic pain in Failed Back Surgery Syndrome patients after 12 months of treatment.
  2. collect safety data for SCS with the Octad® lead in patients with refractory chronic pain.

Study Overview

Status

Status

Indicates the current recruitment status or the expanded access status.
Completed

Conditions

Conditions

The disease, disorder, syndrome, illness, or injury that is being studied. On ClinicalTrials.gov, conditions may also include other health-related issues, such as lifespan, quality of life, and health risks.

Intervention / Treatment

Intervention / Treatment

A process or action that is the focus of a clinical study. Interventions include drugs, medical devices, procedures, vaccines, and other products that are either investigational or already available. Interventions can also include noninvasive approaches, such as education or modifying diet and exercise.

Detailed Description

The use of Spinal Cord Stimulation (SCS) for pain control has already a history of more than 40 years. In SCS, a lead is positioned in the epidural space on the dorsal aspect of the spinal cord so as to produce stimulation induced paraesthesia in the painful area. During the last decades many articles have been published, clearly indicating the effectiveness and safety of SCS with quadripolar leads in the pain management of chronic neuropathic pain, and in particular Failed Back Surgery Syndrome (FBSS). Randomized controlled trials demonstrated that compared with re-operation, SCS provides effective pain relief for at least 3 years and compared with conventional non-surgical neuropathic pain management for at least 2 years.

However, SCS-related complications can occur, that can be divided into surgical complications and hardware complications. The hardware technology has substantially improved over the years. Moreover, electrodes have become smaller in shape and easier to navigate through the epidural space; and finally, internal pulse generators have new programming capabilities and a longer battery life span. All these technological developments led to the application of minimally invasive percutaneous stimulation trials for a variety of patients with chronic neuropathic pain. Turner et al performed a meta-analysis of spinal cord stimulation for failed back surgery syndrome publications and reported hardware complications of 24% lead migration, 7% lead failure and 2% pulse generator failure. While this analysis evaluated studies using older hardware systems, there is first evidence that the rate of these complications is lower currently with new systems. In the recently published PROCESS paper, also using quadripolar electrodes, long term follow-up showed that hardware complications were 14%: lead migration, 3% lead failure and no pulse generator failures.

Generally, patients with radicular pain to the lower extremities respond better to spinal cord stimulation than patients with isolated axial low back pain. However, a few studies have shown that axial low back pain in combination with bilateral leg pain, also respond well to spinal cord stimulation. Both four (e.g. quadripolar Quad lead) and eight (e.g. octapolar Octad® lead) electrodes were shown to be effective in treatment of low back and lower extremity pain, with no apparent advantage of one system over the other. In the recent PROCESS study publication, the reduction of SCS on low-back pain was not-statistically significant when compared to baseline. Even though it seems that eight electrodes may have the potential advantage in case of lead migration or disease progress, no clinical data have been published on the effectiveness of SCS using the octopolar epidural lead. The Octad study is a prospective, multi-center, open-label, non-randomized, interventional study designed to assess the effectiveness and technical performance of SCS with the Octad® lead for treatment of chronic pain. This study is not set up as a comparison study between the Octad lead and other SCS leads, such as the Quad lead, because the Octad lead is used in most eligible FBSS patients as the standard of care lead.

Study Type

Study Type

Describes the nature of a clinical study. Study types include interventional studies (also called clinical trials), observational studies (including patient registries), and expanded access.
Interventional

Enrollment (Actual)

Enrollment

The number of participants in a clinical study. The "anticipated" enrollment is the target number of participants that the researchers need for the study.
80

Phase

Phase

The stage of a clinical trial studying a drug or biological product, based on definitions developed by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA). The phase is based on the study's objective, the number of participants, and other characteristics. There are five phases: Early Phase 1 (formerly listed as Phase 0), Phase 1, Phase 2, Phase 3, and Phase 4. Not Applicable is used to describe trials without FDA-defined phases, including trials of devices or behavioral interventions.
  • Phase 4

Contacts and Locations

This section provides the contact details for those conducting the study, and information on where this study is being conducted.

Study Locations

  • Belgium
      • Antwerpen, Belgium, 2020
        • Hospital ZNA Middelheim
      • Brugge, Belgium, 8000
        • Hospital St Jan
      • Eeklo, Belgium, 9900
        • Hospital Alma Eeklo
      • Gent, Belgium, 9000
        • University Hospital Gent
      • Sint-Niklaas, Belgium, 9100
        • Hospital Nicolaas
      • Zottegem, Belgium, 9620
        • St Elisabeth
  • Norway
      • Stavanger, Norway, 4068
        • Stavanger University Hospital
  • Sweden
      • Gothenburg, Sweden, 41345
        • Shalgrenska Hospital

Participation Criteria

Researchers look for people who fit a certain description, called eligibility criteria. Some examples of these criteria are a person's general health condition or prior treatments.

Eligibility Criteria

Eligibility Criteria

The key requirements that people who want to participate in a clinical study must meet or the characteristics they must have. Eligibility criteria consist of both inclusion criteria (which are required for a person to participate in the study) and exclusion criteria (which prevent a person from participating). Types of eligibility criteria include whether a study accepts healthy volunteers, has age or age group requirements, or is limited by sex.

Ages Eligible for Study

18 years and older (Adult, Older Adult)

Accepts Healthy Volunteers

No

Genders Eligible for Study

All

Description

Inclusion Criteria:

  1. FBSS patients with neuropathic pain in low-back and/or legs who have not reached their therapy goal with other treatment interventions
  2. ≥ 18 years of age
  3. Chronic pain as a result of FBSS that exists for at least 6 months
  4. Mean pain intensity in the legs should be 5 or higher measured on Visual Analogue Scale (VAS).
  5. Patient has been informed of the study procedures and has given written informed consent.
  6. Patient willing to comply with study protocol including attending the study visits.

Exclusion Criteria:

  1. Expected inability of patients to receive or properly operate the spinal cord stimulation system
  2. History of coagulation disorders, lupus erythematosus, diabetic neuropathy, rheumatoid arthritis or morbus Bechterew
  3. Active malignancy
  4. Addiction to any of the following: drugs, alcohol (5E/day) and/or medication
  5. Evidence of an active disruptive psychiatric disorder or other known condition significant enough to impact perception of pain, compliance to intervention and/or ability to evaluate treatment outcome as determined by investigator
  6. Immune deficiency (HIV positive, immunosuppressive, etc.)
  7. Life expectancy < 1 year
  8. Local infection or other skin disorder at site of incision
  9. Pregnancy
  10. Other implanted active medical device
  11. Participation in another clinical trial.

Study Plan

This section provides details of the study plan, including how the study is designed and what the study is measuring.

How is the study designed?

Design Details

  • Primary Purpose: Treatment
  • Allocation: N/A
  • Interventional Model: Single Group Assignment
  • Masking: None (Open Label)

Arms and Interventions

Participant Group / Arm

Participant Group / Arm

A group or subgroup of participants in a clinical trial that receives a specific intervention/treatment, or no intervention, according to the trial's protocol.
Intervention / Treatment

Intervention / Treatment

A process or action that is the focus of a clinical study. Interventions include drugs, medical devices, procedures, vaccines, and other products that are either investigational or already available. Interventions can also include noninvasive approaches, such as education or modifying diet and exercise.
Active Comparator: SCS
patients receiving SCS for chronic leg and/or back pain.
Device: Spinal cord stimulation with eight polar electrode
In SCS a lead is positioned in the epidural space on the dorsal aspect of the spinal cord as to produce electrically induced paraesthesia in the painful area.
Other Names:
  • Spinal column stimulation

What is the study measuring?

Primary Outcome Measures

Primary Outcome Measures

In a clinical study's protocol, the planned outcome measure that is the most important for evaluating the effect of an intervention/treatment. Most clinical studies have one primary outcome measure, but some have more than one.
Outcome Measure
Measure Description
Time Frame
Pain suppression in low back and/or leg
Time Frame: 12 months
Evaluate the evolution of pain control with the octopolar Octad® lead assessed by a decrease in VAS for leg (and low-back pain separately, if applicable) during 12 months follow-up. Actual pain, the least pain during the last week and the worst pain during the last week are scored.
12 months

Secondary Outcome Measures

Secondary Outcome Measures

In a clinical study's protocol, a planned outcome measure that is not as important as the primary outcome measure for evaluating the effect of an intervention but is still of interest. Most clinical studies have more than one secondary outcome measure.
Outcome Measure
Measure Description
Time Frame
adverse events related to SCS
Time Frame: 12 months
Clinical (such as surgery related infections) and technical (such as lead fractures) adverse events will be collected continuously in all patients during a period of 12 months post implant.
12 months
quality of life
Time Frame: 12 months
Quality of life assessed by EuroQol group - 5 Dimensions (EQ-5D)
12 months
sleep
Time Frame: 12 months
Sleep is assessed by a 3 item questionnaire on sleep quality, falling asleep and waking up from pain.
12 months
pain medication intake
Time Frame: 12 months
Data will be collected at specific times on health service resourse use of concomitant pain medication such as opioids.
12 months
Healthcare resource utilization
Time Frame: 12 months
Data will be collected at specific times on health service resourse use of concomitant non-drug therapy use, such as physiotherapy, related to FBSS.
12 months
preferred stimulation settings
Time Frame: 12 months
Characterization of pulsegenerator parameters, such as amplitude, pulse width, stimulation frequency, electrode configuration (positive and negative poles), number of stimulation programs, and stimulation duration is done at specific times.
12 months

Collaborators and Investigators

This is where you will find people and organizations involved with this study.

Sponsor

Sponsor

The organization or person who initiates the study and who has authority and control over the study.
Rik Buschman, PhD

Investigators

Investigators

A researcher involved in a clinical study. Related terms include site principal investigator, site sub-investigator, study chair, study director, and study principal investigator.
  • Principal Investigator: Ann Ver Donck, MD PhD, Hospital St Jan, Brugge, Belgium
  • Principal Investigator: Kliment P Gatzinsky, MD PhD, Sahlgrenska University Hospital, Gothenburg, Sweden
  • Principal Investigator: Roald Baardsen, MD PhD, University hospital Stavanger, Stavanger, Norway

Study record dates

These dates track the progress of study record and summary results submissions to ClinicalTrials.gov. Study records and reported results are reviewed by the National Library of Medicine (NLM) to make sure they meet specific quality control standards before being posted on the public website.

Study Major Dates

Study Start

Study Start

The actual date on which the first participant was enrolled in a clinical study. The "anticipated" study start date is the date that the researchers think will be the study start date.
February 1, 2010

Primary Completion (Actual)

Primary Completion

The date on which the last participant in a clinical study was examined or received an intervention to collect final data for the primary outcome measure. Whether the clinical study ended according to the protocol or was terminated does not affect this date. For clinical studies with more than one primary outcome measure with different completion dates, this term refers to the date on which data collection is completed for all the primary outcome measures. The "anticipated" primary completion date is the date that the researchers think will be the primary completion date for the study.
March 1, 2013

Study Completion (Actual)

Study Completion

The date on which the last participant in a clinical study was examined or received an intervention/treatment to collect final data for the primary outcome measures, secondary outcome measures, and adverse events (that is, the last participant's last visit). The "anticipated" study completion date is the date that the researchers think will be the study completion date.
November 1, 2013

Study Registration Dates

First Submitted

First Submitted

The date on which the study sponsor or investigator first submitted a study record to ClinicalTrials.gov. There is typically a delay of a few days between the first submitted date and the record's availability on ClinicalTrials.gov (the first posted date).
March 8, 2010

First Submitted That Met QC Criteria

First Submitted That Met QC Criteria

The date on which the study sponsor or investigator first submits a study record that is consistent with National Library of Medicine (NLM) quality control (QC) review criteria. The sponsor or investigator may need to revise and submit a study record one or more times before NLM's QC review criteria are met. It is the responsibility of the sponsor or investigator to ensure that the study record is consistent with the NLM QC review criteria.
March 29, 2010

First Posted (Estimate)

First Posted

The date on which the study record was first available on ClinicalTrials.gov after National Library of Medicine (NLM) quality control (QC) review has concluded. There is typically a delay of a few days between the date the study sponsor or investigator submitted the study record and the first posted date.
March 30, 2010

Study Record Updates

Last Update Posted (Estimate)

Last Update Posted

The most recent date on which changes to a study record were made available on ClinicalTrials.gov. There may be a delay between when the changes were submitted to ClinicalTrials.gov by the study's sponsor or investigator (the last update submitted date) and the last update posted date.
November 3, 2013

Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria

Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria

The most recent date on which the study sponsor or investigator submitted changes to a study record that are consistent with National Library of Medicine (NLM) quality control (QC) review criteria. It is the responsibility of the sponsor or investigator to ensure that the study record is consistent with the NLM QC review criteria.
November 1, 2013

Last Verified

Last Verified

The most recent date on which the study sponsor or investigator confirmed the information about a clinical study on ClinicalTrials.gov as accurate and current. If a study with a recruitment status of recruiting; not yet recruiting; or active, not recruiting has not been confirmed within the past 2 years, the study's recruitment status is shown as unknown.
November 1, 2013

More Information

Terms related to this study

Keywords

Additional Relevant MeSH Terms

Other Study ID Numbers

Other Study ID Numbers

Identifiers or ID numbers other than the NCT number that are assigned to a clinical study by the study's sponsor, funders, or others. These numbers may include unique identifiers from other trial registries and National Institutes of Health grant numbers.
  • Octad study

This information was retrieved directly from the website clinicaltrials.gov without any changes. If you have any requests to change, remove or update your study details, please contact register@clinicaltrials.gov. As soon as a change is implemented on clinicaltrials.gov, this will be updated automatically on our website as well.

Clinical Trials on Failed Back Surgery Syndrome

Clinical Trials on Spinal cord stimulation with eight polar electrode

Search Similar Trials

Sponsors and Collaborators

Medical Conditions

Drug Interventions

Conditions

Rare Diseases

Drug Interventions

Dietary Supplements

Sponsor/Collaborators

Locations

Cookie Settings

We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website. For more details carefully read our Privacy and Cookies Policy. ...>>>You can change your preferences or withdraw your consent at any time by deleting the cookies from your website or computer as described in the policy. Please accept it and choose your preferences by ticking the corresponding boxes in the "Manage Settings" section below. Please carefully read our Terms of Service before you proceed with using any part of this website.
«Manage Settings