Titanium vs. PEEK Fusion Devices in 1 Level TLIF (TLIF)
A Prospective, Randomized Comparison of Titanium vs. PEEK Fusion Devices in 1 Level TLIF
Study Overview
Status
Status
Conditions
Conditions
Intervention / Treatment
Intervention / Treatment
Detailed Description
Study Type
Study Type
Enrollment (Estimated)
Enrollment
Phase
Phase
- Phase 4
Contacts and Locations
Study Contact
Study Contact
- Name: John M Dawson, PhD
- Phone Number: 612-775-6200
- Email: jmdawson@tcspine.com
Study Contact Backup
- Name: Berit A Swanberg, BA
- Phone Number: 6182 612-775-6200
- Email: baswanberg@tcspine.com
Study Locations
-
-
Minnesota
-
Minneapolis, Minnesota, United States, 55404
- Twin Cities Spine Center
-
-
Participation Criteria
Eligibility Criteria
Eligibility Criteria
Ages Eligible for Study
Accepts Healthy Volunteers
Description
Inclusion Criteria
- Patients undergoing 1 level TLIF for the treatment of lumbar stenosis and spondylolisthesis who have failed at least 6 weeks of non-operative treatment.
- Patients between 18-70 years of age at the time of surgery.
Exclusion Criteria
- Patients under 18 or over 70 years of age at the time of surgery.
- Patients undergoing more than 1 level of surgery.
- Patients who have had prior lumbar fusion.
- Patients requiring surgery for the management of infection, tumor, or trauma.
- Patients who are pregnant.
Study Plan
How is the study designed?
Design Details
- Primary Purpose: Treatment
- Allocation: Randomized
- Interventional Model: Parallel Assignment
- Masking: Single
Number of Arms
Arms and Interventions
Participant Group / ArmParticipant Group / Arm |
Intervention / TreatmentIntervention / Treatment |
|---|---|
|
Experimental: PEEK
Medtronic Capstone
|
PEEK fusion device will be utilized for one-level lumbar fusion.
|
|
Experimental: Titanium
Medtronic Adaptix
|
Titanium fusion device will be utilized for one-level lumbar fusion.
|
What is the study measuring?
Primary Outcome Measures
Primary Outcome Measures
Outcome Measure |
Measure Description |
Time Frame |
|---|---|---|
|
Fusion Status of 1 level Lumbar TLIF
Time Frame: 12 months Post-Op
|
Assess fusion status of 1 level Lumbar TLIF by reviewing patient CT Scan completed for study purposes.
|
12 months Post-Op
|
|
Revision Surgeries
Time Frame: Up to 24 months Post-op
|
Monitor and Record Complications and Revision Surgeries
|
Up to 24 months Post-op
|
Secondary Outcome Measures
Secondary Outcome Measures
Outcome Measure |
Measure Description |
Time Frame |
|---|---|---|
|
Patient Reported Outcome Measures
Time Frame: Preoperative time frame up to 24 months Post-op
|
Data collected from patient self reported outcome tools
|
Preoperative time frame up to 24 months Post-op
|
Collaborators and Investigators
Sponsor
Sponsor
Publications and helpful links
General Publications
- Nemoto O, Asazuma T, Yato Y, Imabayashi H, Yasuoka H, Fujikawa A. Comparison of fusion rates following transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion using polyetheretherketone cages or titanium cages with transpedicular instrumentation. Eur Spine J. 2014 Oct;23(10):2150-5. doi: 10.1007/s00586-014-3466-9. Epub 2014 Jul 12.
- Rickert M, Fleege C, Tarhan T, Schreiner S, Makowski MR, Rauschmann M, Arabmotlagh M. Transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion using polyetheretherketone oblique cages with and without a titanium coating: a randomised clinical pilot study. Bone Joint J. 2017 Oct;99-B(10):1366-1372. doi: 10.1302/0301-620X.99B10.BJJ-2016-1292.R2.
- Hasegawa T, Ushirozako H, Shigeto E, Ohba T, Oba H, Mukaiyama K, Shimizu S, Yamato Y, Ide K, Shibata Y, Ojima T, Takahashi J, Haro H, Matsuyama Y. The Titanium-coated PEEK Cage Maintains Better Bone Fusion With the Endplate Than the PEEK Cage 6 Months After PLIF Surgery: A Multicenter, Prospective, Randomized Study. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2020 Aug 1;45(15):E892-E902. doi: 10.1097/BRS.0000000000003464.
- Villavicencio AT, Nelson EL, Rajpal S, Beasley K, Burneikiene S. Prospective, randomized, double-blinded clinical trial comparing PEEK and allograft spacers in patients undergoing transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion surgeries. Spine J. 2022 Jan;22(1):84-94. doi: 10.1016/j.spinee.2021.06.005. Epub 2021 Jun 8.
- Seaman S, Kerezoudis P, Bydon M, Torner JC, Hitchon PW. Titanium vs. polyetheretherketone (PEEK) interbody fusion: Meta-analysis and review of the literature. J Clin Neurosci. 2017 Oct;44:23-29. doi: 10.1016/j.jocn.2017.06.062. Epub 2017 Jul 21.
- Cuzzocrea F, Ivone A, Jannelli E, Fioruzzi A, Ferranti E, Vanelli R, Benazzo F. PEEK versus metal cages in posterior lumbar interbody fusion: a clinical and radiological comparative study. Musculoskelet Surg. 2019 Dec;103(3):237-241. doi: 10.1007/s12306-018-0580-6. Epub 2018 Dec 10.
Study record dates
Study Major Dates
Study Start (Actual)
Study Start
Primary Completion (Estimated)
Primary Completion
Study Completion (Estimated)
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
- 1944564
Plan for Individual participant data (IPD)
Plan to Share Individual Participant Data (IPD)?
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.