A Study Comparing Fusion Rates of Two Lumbar Fusion Procedures

June 3, 2014 updated by: Baxano Surgical, Inc.

Prospective Multicenter Clinical Evaluation of Fusion

The purpose of this study is to demonstrate the relative efficacy of two lumbar fusion procedures: transacral lumbar interbody fusion when used in conjunction with unilateral or bilateral posterior pedicle screw fixation as an adjunct to fusion, in comparison to transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) when used in conjunction with unilateral or bilateral supplemental screw fixation as an adjunct to fusion.

Subject candidates are those who had previously required and received fusion at L4-L5-S1 where these were the only lumbar levels treated for pseudoarthrosis, spinal stenosis, spondylolisthesis, or degenerative disc disease (DDD).

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.

Detailed Description

Consecutive subjects who were treated with the transsacral lumbar interbody fusion or TLIF procedures at least 2 years prior to the date the data is collected will be evaluated.

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.
Observational

Enrollment (Anticipated)

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.
60

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

  • United States
    • Florida
      • Tampa, Florida, United States, 33637
        • Foundation for Orthopaedic Research and Education
    • Indiana
      • Indianapolis, Indiana, United States, 46032
        • Indiana Spine Group
    • Louisiana
      • Baton Rouge, Louisiana, United States, 70808
        • Bone and Joint Clinic of Baton Rouge
    • Michigan
      • Waterford, Michigan, United States, 48327
        • Michigan Spine Institute
    • Texas
      • College Station, Texas, United States, 77845
        • Brazos Spine

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

Sampling Method

Non-Probability Sample

Study Population

Subject candidates are those who had required fusion at L4-L5-S1 where these were the only lumbar levels treated for pseudoarthrosis, spinal stenosis, spondylolisthesis, or degenerative disc disease (DDD).

Description

Inclusion Criteria:

  • Adult 18 years of age or older
  • Male or female subject that had previously received the transsacral two-level procedure when used in conjunction with pedicle screw or facet screw fixation or TLIF two-level procedure with unilateral or bilateral supplemental screw fixation (e.g. pedicle screws, facet screws at L4-L5-S1 to treat pseudoarthrosis, spinal stenosis, spondylolisthesis, or degenerative disc disease (DDD)
  • Subject that was treated no less than 2 years prior to this evaluation with an transsacral or TLIF procedure by the participating surgeons
  • Subject that had a diagnosis that required a transsacral or TLIF procedure at the L4-L5-S1 levels and did not require treatment at any other lumbar levels at the time of surgery

Exclusion Criteria:

  • Subject who did not receive the transsacral or TLIF procedure for fusion of L4-L5-S1
  • Subject who received lumbar fusion procedures at levels other than L4-L5-S1 at the time of surgery

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

Cohorts and Interventions

Group / Cohort

Group / Cohort

A group or subgroup of participants in an observational study that is assessed for biomedical or health outcomes.
Previous transsacral fusion
Subject candidates are those who had required a transsacral fusion at L4-L5-S1 where these were the only lumbar levels treated for pseudoarthrosis, spinal stenosis, spondylolisthesis, or degenerative disc disease (DDD).
Previous transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion
Subject candidates are those who had required transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion at L4-L5-S1 where these were the only lumbar levels treated for pseudoarthrosis, spinal stenosis, spondylolisthesis, or degenerative disc disease (DDD).

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
Efficacy
Time Frame: Assessed at 2 years post-op or greater
Fusion of the targeted vertebral bodies (L4-L5-S1) at 24 months as determined by independent orthopedic surgeon reviewer interpretation of high resolution Computed Tomography (CT) scan.
Assessed at 2 years post-op or greater

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
Safety
Time Frame: 2 years post-op
Incidence of major device-related adverse events and/or failures, defined as those requiring revision surgery or a secondary operation, or events resulting in permanent disability or death.
2 years post-op

Other Outcome Measures

Other Outcome Measures

For clinical trials, a planned measurement described in the protocol that is used to determine the effect of an intervention/treatment on participants. For observational studies, a measurement or observation that is used to describe patterns of diseases or traits, or associations with exposures, risk factors, or treatment. Types of outcome measures include primary outcome measure and secondary outcome measure.
Outcome Measure
Measure Description
Time Frame
Additional Secondary Endpoint: Efficacy
Time Frame: Assessed at 2 years post-op
Comparative Lordosis of L4-S1 at 24-months as determined by an independent orthopedic surgeon reviewer's interpretation of 24-month lateral (neutral) radiographs compared to baseline.
Assessed at 2 years post-op

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.
Baxano Surgical, Inc.

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.
April 1, 2013

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.
February 1, 2014

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.
February 1, 2014

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).
October 24, 2013

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.
October 29, 2013

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.
October 30, 2013

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.
June 4, 2014

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.
June 3, 2014

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.
June 1, 2014

More Information

Terms related to this study

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.
  • PR-0023

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 Spinal Stenosis

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