The Degen Study: Post-market Clinical Follow-up on the PASS LP, PASS Degen and PASS Tulip Systems (PASS DEGEN) (PASS DEGEN)
The Degen Study: Post-market Clinical Follow-up on the PASS LP, PASS Degen and PASS Tulip Systems.
Study Overview
Status
Status
Conditions
Conditions
Intervention / Treatment
Intervention / Treatment
Study Type
Study Type
Enrollment (Actual)
Enrollment
Contacts and Locations
Study Locations
-
-
-
Bruges, France, 33520
- Clinique du Dos Bordeaux - Terrefort
-
Cornebarrieu, France, 31700
- Clinique des Cèdres
-
Tours, France, 37044
- CHRU Tours, Hôpital de Bretonneau
-
-
Île-de-France Region
-
Paris, Île-de-France Region, France, 75651
- Hôpital Pitié-Salpêtrière AP-HP
-
-
Participation Criteria
Eligibility Criteria
Eligibility Criteria
Ages Eligible for Study
Accepts Healthy Volunteers
Sampling Method
Study Population
Description
Inclusion Criteria:
- Patients of at least 18 years old
- Patient suffering from a spinal degenerative disease.
- Patient requiring spinal surgery for less than 4 levels for a spinal degenerative disease
- Patient implanted with MEDICREA's products, or patients who are candidate to receive including at least the PASS LP and/or PASS DEGEN and/or PASS TULIP Prime implants
- Patient affiliated to a national insurance system
Exclusion Criteria:
- Patient unable or unwilling to sign and understand an information note with proof of patient consent
- Patient unable to complete a self-administered questionnaire
- Patient presenting contra-indications to a Xray follow-up
- Patient of more than 18 years old under a protection procedure
- Patient judged as non-compliant by the investigator or not able to come back for follow-up visits up to 2 years
Study Plan
How is the study designed?
Design Details
Number of groups / cohorts
Cohorts and Interventions
Group / CohortGroup / Cohort |
Intervention / TreatmentIntervention / Treatment |
|---|---|
|
PASS LP implants
Patient suffering from a spinal degenerative disease and who is operated with PASS LP
|
Thoraco lumbar arthrodesis
|
|
PASS Degen implants
Patient suffering from a spinal degenerative disease and who is operated with PASS DEGEN
|
Thoraco lumbar arthrodesis
|
|
PASS Tulip PRIME implants
Patient suffering from a spinal degenerative disease and who is operated with PASS TULIP PRIME
|
Thoraco lumbar arthrodesis
|
What is the study measuring?
Primary Outcome Measures
Primary Outcome Measures
Outcome Measure |
Measure Description |
Time Frame |
|---|---|---|
|
Number of Participant Who Achieved Their Fusion at 24 Months
Time Frame: At 24months
|
The primary endpoint is the fusion status of each patient at the 24-month visit postoperative.
This fusion assessment will be done through the analysis of the standard of care imaging (CT-scan, X-rays, and/or MRI) by the investigator and through the clinical examination of the patient by the investigator.
|
At 24months
|
Secondary Outcome Measures
Secondary Outcome Measures
Outcome Measure |
Measure Description |
Time Frame |
|---|---|---|
|
Evolution of the Pain (VAS)
Time Frame: Preoperative, and 1-6, 12 and 24 months postoperative
|
Change of leg and back pain score from the preoperative visit to all available postoperative timepoints: from 0 (better) to 10 (worst)
|
Preoperative, and 1-6, 12 and 24 months postoperative
|
|
Quality of Life With ODI
Time Frame: Preoperative, and 1-6, 12 and 24 months postoperative
|
Change of non-validated ODI score from the preoperative visit to all available postoperative timepoints: from 0 (better) to 50 (worst)
|
Preoperative, and 1-6, 12 and 24 months postoperative
|
|
Quality of Life With SF-12
Time Frame: Preoperative, and 1-6, 12 and 24 months postoperative
|
Change of non-validated SF-12 score from the preoperative visit to all available postoperative timepoints: from to 0 (better) to 5 (worst) by question, then questions are combined following the SF12 provider recommendation.
The scoring yields two summary measures: the Physical Component Summary (PCS) and the Mental Component Summary (MCS).
The PCS and MCS can be between O and 100.
|
Preoperative, and 1-6, 12 and 24 months postoperative
|
|
Surgeons'Satisfaction With These Implants and Instruments
Time Frame: During the surgery and until the 24months postoperative visit
|
Surgeons will be requested to complete questions about device/surgery satisfaction.
|
During the surgery and until the 24months postoperative visit
|
|
Fusion Status at the 1/6 Month and 12-month Visit
Time Frame: At the 1-6, and 12 months postoperative
|
The primary objective is defined as the ability of the implant to promote the stabilization
|
At the 1-6, and 12 months postoperative
|
|
Patient Satisfaction at All Available Postoperative Timepoints
Time Frame: At 1-6, 12 and 24 months postoperative
|
Patient satisfaction is used to evaluate patient satisfaction after surgery and during the follow-up period. Satisfaction is measured at four different levels: 1 (better) to 4 (worst) |
At 1-6, 12 and 24 months postoperative
|
Collaborators and Investigators
Sponsor
Sponsor
Publications and helpful links
General Publications
- Gandek B, Ware JE, Aaronson NK, Apolone G, Bjorner JB, Brazier JE, Bullinger M, Kaasa S, Leplege A, Prieto L, Sullivan M. Cross-validation of item selection and scoring for the SF-12 Health Survey in nine countries: results from the IQOLA Project. International Quality of Life Assessment. J Clin Epidemiol. 1998 Nov;51(11):1171-8. doi: 10.1016/s0895-4356(98)00109-7.
- Copay AG, Glassman SD, Subach BR, Berven S, Schuler TC, Carreon LY. Minimum clinically important difference in lumbar spine surgery patients: a choice of methods using the Oswestry Disability Index, Medical Outcomes Study questionnaire Short Form 36, and pain scales. Spine J. 2008 Nov-Dec;8(6):968-74. doi: 10.1016/j.spinee.2007.11.006. Epub 2008 Jan 16.
- Fairbank JC, Pynsent PB. The Oswestry Disability Index. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2000 Nov 15;25(22):2940-52; discussion 2952. doi: 10.1097/00007632-200011150-00017.
- Hagg O, Fritzell P, Nordwall A; Swedish Lumbar Spine Study Group. The clinical importance of changes in outcome scores after treatment for chronic low back pain. Eur Spine J. 2003 Feb;12(1):12-20. doi: 10.1007/s00586-002-0464-0. Epub 2002 Oct 24.
- Johnsen LG, Hellum C, Nygaard OP, Storheim K, Brox JI, Rossvoll I, Leivseth G, Grotle M. Comparison of the SF6D, the EQ5D, and the oswestry disability index in patients with chronic low back pain and degenerative disc disease. BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2013 Apr 26;14:148. doi: 10.1186/1471-2474-14-148.
- Glassman SD, Carreon LY, Djurasovic M, Dimar JR, Johnson JR, Puno RM, Campbell MJ. Lumbar fusion outcomes stratified by specific diagnostic indication. Spine J. 2009 Jan-Feb;9(1):13-21. doi: 10.1016/j.spinee.2008.08.011. Epub 2008 Sep 19.
- Fairbank JC. Why are there different versions of the Oswestry Disability Index? J Neurosurg Spine. 2014 Jan;20(1):83-6. doi: 10.3171/2013.9.SPINE13344. Epub 2013 Nov 8.
- Gum JL, Carreon LY, Stimac JD, Glassman SD. Predictors of Oswestry Disability Index worsening after lumbar fusion. Orthopedics. 2013 Apr;36(4):e478-83. doi: 10.3928/01477447-20130327-26.
- Ghogawala Z, Whitmore RG, Watters WC 3rd, Sharan A, Mummaneni PV, Dailey AT, Choudhri TF, Eck JC, Groff MW, Wang JC, Resnick DK, Dhall SS, Kaiser MG. Guideline update for the performance of fusion procedures for degenerative disease of the lumbar spine. Part 3: assessment of economic outcome. J Neurosurg Spine. 2014 Jul;21(1):14-22. doi: 10.3171/2014.4.SPINE14259.
Study record dates
Study Major Dates
Study Start (Actual)
Study Start
Primary Completion (Actual)
Primary Completion
Study Completion (Actual)
Study Completion
Study Registration Dates
First Submitted
First Submitted
First Submitted That Met QC Criteria
First Submitted That Met QC Criteria
First Posted (Actual)
First Posted
Study Record Updates
Last Update Posted (Actual)
Last Update Posted
Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria
Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria
Last Verified
Last Verified
More Information
Terms related to this study
Additional Relevant MeSH Terms
Other Study ID Numbers
Other Study ID Numbers
- 0313
Drug and device information, study documents
Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated drug product
Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated device product
product manufactured in and exported from the U.S.
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.