Effectiveness of Adipose Tissue Derived Mesenchymal Stem Cells as Osteogenic Component in Composite Grafts (ROBUST)

September 16, 2014 updated by: University Hospital, Basel, Switzerland

Effectiveness of Adipose Tissue Derived Mesenchymal Stem Cells as Osteogenic Component in Composite Grafts Versus Acellular Bone Graft Substitutes for Augmentation in the Treatment of Proximal Humeral Fractures as Model for Fractures of Osteoporotic Bone - a Prospective Randomized First in Men Proof of Principle Trial

Failure rates of up to 30% are reported after proximal humeral fractures despite angular-stable devices. This may devastate not only the functional outcome but also the independence of elderly patients.

To increase bone mineral density and thereby holding-strength augmentation is an option. Autologous bone-graft, as current gold-standard, though is questionable in osteoporosis since osteoprogenitors are dysfunctional and the harvesting-morbidity considerable. Adipose tissue seems an alternative cell-source even in presence of osteoporosis.

Stromal vascular fraction (SVF) cells isolated from lipoaspirates display osteogenic and vasculogenic potential and can be harvested in high numbers. Expansion associated with costly good-manufacturers-practice facilities is avoidable, so are repeated interventions. These cells have been successfully used to generate osteogenic composite grafts with intrinsic vascularity in preclinical models.

For translation into clinical practice after a 20 patient external pilot a prospective randomized controlled trial with 270 patients is planned. For the trial lipoaspiration precedes open reduction and internal fixation in individuals over 60 years presenting with a proximal humeral fracture after low-energy trauma. Cells are isolated (Cellution®800/CRS) and wrapped around hydroxyapatite microgranules after embedding in a fibrin-gel for augmentation of the typical bone-void. Clinical/radiological follow-up is at 6 and 12 weeks for immediate complications and after 6, 9 and 12 months. Functional assessment is performed after 6 weeks, 6 and 12 months using the Quick-Dash- and Constant-Score.

The primary outcome is a reduction in secondary dislocation by 50% during the first postoperative year. Secondary dislocation is diagnosed on plain radiographs by an independent board certified radiologist specialised in musculoskeletal imaging if one or more of the following criteria are met:

  • More than 20° varus collapse of the humeral head fragment in relation to the humeral shaft
  • Screw penetration through the humeral head

Study Overview

Study Type

Interventional

Enrollment (Actual)

8

Phase

  • Phase 2

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

    • Basel-Stadt
      • Basel, Basel-Stadt, Switzerland, 4031
        • University Hospital Basel

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

Ages Eligible for Study

50 years and older (ADULT, OLDER_ADULT)

Accepts Healthy Volunteers

No

Genders Eligible for Study

All

Description

Inclusion Criteria:

Presentation with an isolated proximal humeral fracture after a low-energy trauma (e.g. falling from a standing position) and:

  • indication for open reduction and internal fixation with a proximal humeral locking plate (PHILOS®, Synthes, Switzerland) after low energy trauma

    • displacement of more than 1 cm between fragments and/or
    • angulation of 45° or more between the fragments and/or
    • dislocation of the greater tuberosity of 5 mm or more and/or
    • patient specific factors like high functional demand etc
  • age > 50 years
  • postmenopausal status (i.e. 12 continuous month without menstruation)
  • informed consent in surgery and study participation

Exclusion Criteria:

  • Psychiatric disorder severely impairing co-operation (dementia mini mental Status (MMS) <24, schizophrenia, major depression)
  • Pathological fractures caused by other conditions
  • Fracture-related nerve injury
  • Malignancies under current treatment (i.e. chemotherapy, radiotherapy etc.)
  • BMI <20 kg/m2
  • Known hypersensitivity to one of the graft components
  • Participation in a clinical trial within 3 month before enrolment

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: RANDOMIZED
  • Interventional Model: PARALLEL
  • Masking: SINGLE

Arms and Interventions

Participant Group / Arm
Intervention / Treatment
EXPERIMENTAL: cellularized composite graft augmentation
lipoaspiration by experienced plastic surgeon, isolation of SVF cells using a Cellution/CR800® cell isolation device and single use kits (Cytori Therapeutics Inc., San Diego) during open reduction and internal fixation, augmentation of bone with cell-seeded bone graft substitute;
liposuction, cell isolation, embedding of SVF cells in fibrin gel, wrapping around hydroxyapatite granules
Other Names:
  • Cellution/CR800, Cytori, US
  • Tisseel, Baxter, Germany
  • Actifuse Microgranules, Apatech, Germany
ACTIVE_COMPARATOR: Control acellular composite graft augmentation
open reduction internal fixation (ORIF) of the fracture, augmentation with acellular bone graft substitute.
Open reduction and internal fixation using acellular augmentation with fibrin embedded granulated hydroxyapatite
Other Names:
  • Tisseel, Baxter, Germany
  • Actifuse Microgranules, Apatech, Germany

What is the study measuring?

Primary Outcome Measures

Outcome Measure
Measure Description
Time Frame
Development of secondary dislocation within 12 months postoperative
Time Frame: 12 months postoperative

Secondary dislocation within the first year postoperative on plain radiographs in ap. and Neer projections diagnosed by an independent radiologist specialized in musculoskeletal imaging in case of

  • more than 20° varus collapse of the humeral head fragment in relation to the humeral shaft
  • screw penetration through the humeral head
12 months postoperative

Secondary Outcome Measures

Outcome Measure
Measure Description
Time Frame
Functional outcome 6 weeks, 6 and 12 months after fixation
Time Frame: 12 months postoperative
Functional outcome 6 weeks, 6 and 12 months after fixation: the functional outcome will be recorded by the Quick Dash Score and the Constant at each follow up visit and compared between the two groups. Additionally, pain at either surgical site will be recorded via the visual analogue scale.
12 months postoperative
Safety
Time Frame: 12 months postoperative
safety: all adverse reactions will be recorded and analysed to assess the safety of the approach in a typical patient population.
12 months postoperative
bone mineral density
Time Frame: 12 months postoperative
bone mineral density: in case of implant removal (see below) a 100 mm3 bone biopsy will be taken from the grafted area and analysed with MicroCT (micro computed tomography) for bone mineral density.
12 months postoperative
Histology
Time Frame: 12 months postoperative
histological assessment of qualitative and quantitative bone formation: bone biopsies will - after MicroCT assessment - be decalcified and histologically analysed using standard techniques and image quantification
12 months postoperative
Dose-response
Time Frame: 12 months postoperative
establishment of a dose response relationship between number of implanted cells an bone quantity in microCT and histologically via image quantification: retrospectively the quantitative measures of bone formation will be correlated to the number of implanted cells and their clonogenicity
12 months postoperative

Collaborators and Investigators

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

Investigators

  • Principal Investigator: Franziska Saxer, MD, University Hospital, Basel, Switzerland
  • Principal Investigator: Marcel Jakob, MD, University Hospital, Basel, Switzerland

Publications and helpful links

The person responsible for entering information about the study voluntarily provides these publications. These may be about anything related to the study.

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

June 1, 2012

Primary Completion (ACTUAL)

September 1, 2014

Study Completion (ACTUAL)

September 1, 2014

Study Registration Dates

First Submitted

January 5, 2012

First Submitted That Met QC Criteria

February 8, 2012

First Posted (ESTIMATE)

February 13, 2012

Study Record Updates

Last Update Posted (ESTIMATE)

September 17, 2014

Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria

September 16, 2014

Last Verified

September 1, 2014

More Information

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 Osteoporotic Fractures

Clinical Trials on Cellularized composite graft augmentation

3
Subscribe