- ICH GCP
- US Clinical Trials Registry
- Clinical Trial NCT02068729
Comparison of Complication Rates Between Lateral Approaches to the Lumbar Spine (RAVINE)
A Comparison of Complication Rates Between Lateral Approaches to the Lumbar Spine: K2M RAVINE® Far Lateral System Versus NuVasive XLIF®
Study Overview
Status
Detailed Description
Study Type
Enrollment (Actual)
Participation Criteria
Eligibility Criteria
Ages Eligible for Study
Accepts Healthy Volunteers
Genders Eligible for Study
Sampling Method
Study Population
Description
Inclusion Criteria:
- Diagnosis of DDD with up to Grade 1 spondylolisthesis, confirmed clinically and radiographically, requiring surgical intervention at one or two contiguous levels between L2-S1
- Inadequate response to conservative medical care over a period of at least 6 months
- Willing and able to comply with the requirements of the protocol including follow-up requirements
- Willing and able to sign a study specific informed consent
- Skeletally mature and ≥ 18 years of age at the time of enrollment
Exclusion Criteria:
- Previous anterior/posterior/lateral spine surgery at the index level
- Previous posterior/lateral spine surgery (e.g., posterior element decompression) that destabilizes the lumbar spine
- Active systemic infection or infection at the operative site
- Co-morbid medical conditions of the spine or upper/lower extremities that may affect the lumbar spine neurological and/or pain assessment
- Metabolic bone disease such as osteoporosis that contradicts spinal surgery
- History of an osteoporotic fracture
- History of an endocrine or metabolic disorder (e.g., Paget's disease) known to affect bone and mineral metabolism
- Taking medications that may interfere with bony/soft tissue healing including chronic steroid use
- Known allergy to titanium, cobalt chrome or PEEK
- Rheumatoid arthritis or other autoimmune disease or a systemic disorder such as HIV, active hepatitis B or C or fibromyalgia
- Current medical condition (e.g., unstable cardiac disease, cancer) that may result in patient death or have an effect on outcomes prior to study completion
- Pregnant, or intend to become pregnant, during the course of the study
- Severe obesity (Body Mass Index > 40)
- Physical or mental condition (e.g., psychiatric disorder, senile dementia, Alzheimer's disease, alcohol or drug addiction) that would interfere with patient self-assessment of function, pain or quality of life
- Involved in current or pending spinal litigation where permanent disability benefits are being sought
- Incarcerated at the time of study enrollment
- Current participation in an investigational study that may impact study outcomes
Study Plan
How is the study designed?
Design Details
What is the study measuring?
Primary Outcome Measures
Outcome Measure |
Measure Description |
Time Frame |
|---|---|---|
|
Visual Analog Scale (VAS) Change From Baseline
Time Frame: 24 months
|
Evaluation of the change of the Back VAS, Hip VAS and the Leg VAS at the 24 month post-operative visit as compared to pre-op time periods. Information on all reports of pain/numbness/tingling and the location of symptoms were captured and evaluated. VAS scale ranged from 0 - 10cm with the 10cm accounting for the highest level of pain. |
24 months
|
|
Number of Patients With Adverse Events AEs)
Time Frame: Operative to 24 month
|
The evaluation of all adverse events including device related, procedure related and additional serious adverse events.
|
Operative to 24 month
|
Secondary Outcome Measures
Outcome Measure |
Measure Description |
Time Frame |
|---|---|---|
|
Change in Pain/Dysesthesia Score From Baseline (Pre-Operative)
Time Frame: time of discharge, an average of 4.5 days, up to 8 weeks post-operatively, 3 months, 6 months, 12 months, 24 months
|
Neurological evaluation of the patient, with specific evaluation of psoas muscle weakness, radiating radicular pain, knee extension weakness, dorsiflexion weakness, plantarflexion weakness and anterior thigh numbness was performed using Patient symptom Questionnaire (0-100mm analog scale with 100mm being the highest pain/weakness/numbness)
|
time of discharge, an average of 4.5 days, up to 8 weeks post-operatively, 3 months, 6 months, 12 months, 24 months
|
|
Change in Oswestry Disability Index From Baseline (Pre-Operative)
Time Frame: time of discharge, an average of 4.5 days, up to 8 weeks post-operatively, 3 months, 6 months, 12 months, 24 months
|
The Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) is a validated instrument including items that relate to subjective symptomatology and activities of daily living (pain intensity, personal care, lifting, walking, sitting, standing, sex life, traveling).
This patient-reported outcome measure is a 10 item questionnaire that evaluates disability and functional impairment associated with back problems.
Each item is scored from O up to 5, with higher scores corresponding to greater disability.
A total ODI score is determined by adding the scores of the individual questions and dividing that total by the maximum possible score (i.e., 50 if all questions are answered) to yield a percentage.
Therefore, the ODI score ranges from 0% to 100%.
|
time of discharge, an average of 4.5 days, up to 8 weeks post-operatively, 3 months, 6 months, 12 months, 24 months
|
|
Change in Health-Related Quality of Life From Baseline (Pre-op)
Time Frame: time of discharge, an average of 4.5 days, up to 8 weeks post-operatively, 3 months, 6 months, 12 months, 24 months
|
Health-related quality of life was evaluated in all study subjects using the SF-12v2 Health Survey.
This shortened and simplified version of the SF-36 makes the questionnaire less ambiguous for patients.
It has a self-administered form that makes it easy to read and complete, and that reduces missing responses.
The physical and mental component summary scales, referred to as PCS-12 and MCS-12 were evaluated against published normative values and a 15% improvement in these scores was used as an assessment of success.
In calculating the true value of a treatment, the scores from the SF-12v2 were converted into a utility index (SF-6D), which considered not only how many years a medical intervention could have added to a patient's life, but also the quality of that life.
Use of the SF-6D did not expand the questions administered to the patients.
The scale ranged from 0-100% with 100% being the best quality of life.
|
time of discharge, an average of 4.5 days, up to 8 weeks post-operatively, 3 months, 6 months, 12 months, 24 months
|
|
Radiographic Assessments
Time Frame: 12 mo to 24 mo
|
Quantitative and qualitative radiographic assessment of the pre and post-operative AP, and Lateral, Flexion/Extension images were performed. Radiographic and qualitative assessments performed include:
|
12 mo to 24 mo
|
|
Patient Satisfaction
Time Frame: 12 month and 24 month
|
At the 12 month and 24 month follow-up visits, subjects were asked whether they were satisfied with the outcome of their surgery (Yes/No) and whether they would repeat the operation (Yes/No).
|
12 month and 24 month
|
|
Odom's Criteria
Time Frame: 24 months
|
At the 24 month follow-up visit, the Investigator rated the clinical disposition of each study subject according to Odom's Criteria as follows: Excellent: all pre-operative symptoms relieved, able to carry out daily occupations without impairment. Good: minimum persistence of pre-operative symptoms, able to carry out daily occupations without significant interference. Fair/Satisfactory: relief of some pre-operative symptoms but physical activity is significantly limited. Poor: symptoms or signs unchanged or worse. |
24 months
|
|
Surgery Time
Time Frame: During operation.
|
The length of the surgical procedure from the initial incision to final closure were captured from the Anesthesia Record.
|
During operation.
|
|
Anesthesia Time
Time Frame: During operation.
|
The length of time the patient is under anesthesia were captured from the Anesthesia Record.
|
During operation.
|
|
Estimated Blood Loss
Time Frame: During Operation
|
The amount of blood loss over the entire length of the surgery, documented on the Anesthesia Record, was captured.
|
During Operation
|
|
Number of Participants With Abnormal Neuromonitoring System Results
Time Frame: During operation
|
Abnormal result(s) of neuromonitoring systems (Train of Four, Electromyography (EMG), Triggered EMG, Somato Sensory Evoked Potential (SSEP) and Motor Evoked Potential (MEP)) utilized during the surgery were captured.
|
During operation
|
|
Length of Hospital Stay
Time Frame: From admission to discharge
|
The length of hospital stay from the date of hospital admission to the date of discharge was calculated.
|
From admission to discharge
|
|
Change in Work/School Status Compared to Baseline
Time Frame: Pre-operative to 24 months
|
The ability to and the time it takes for the subject to be cleared to return to work/school from the date of surgery was documented.
|
Pre-operative to 24 months
|
|
Change in Use of Narcotics Post-Surgery Compared to Baseline
Time Frame: Pre-operative to 24 months
|
The types and dosages of any narcotics taken by the patient post-surgery were documented.
|
Pre-operative to 24 months
|
Collaborators and Investigators
Sponsor
Publications and helpful links
General Publications
- Malham GM, Ellis NJ, Parker RM, Seex KA. Clinical outcome and fusion rates after the first 30 extreme lateral interbody fusions. ScientificWorldJournal. 2012;2012:246989. doi: 10.1100/2012/246989. Epub 2012 Nov 1.
- Caputo AM, Michael KW, Chapman TM Jr, Massey GM, Howes CR, Isaacs RE, Brown CR. Clinical outcomes of extreme lateral interbody fusion in the treatment of adult degenerative scoliosis. ScientificWorldJournal. 2012;2012:680643. doi: 10.1100/2012/680643. Epub 2012 Sep 24.
- Youssef JA, McAfee PC, Patty CA, Raley E, DeBauche S, Shucosky E, Chotikul L. Minimally invasive surgery: lateral approach interbody fusion: results and review. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2010 Dec 15;35(26 Suppl):S302-11. doi: 10.1097/BRS.0b013e3182023438.
- Berjano P, Balsano M, Buric J, Petruzzi M, Lamartina C. Direct lateral access lumbar and thoracolumbar fusion: preliminary results. Eur Spine J. 2012 May;21 Suppl 1(Suppl 1):S37-42. doi: 10.1007/s00586-012-2217-z. Epub 2012 Mar 9.
Study record dates
Study Major Dates
Study Start
Primary Completion (ACTUAL)
Study Completion (ACTUAL)
Study Registration Dates
First Submitted
First Submitted That Met QC Criteria
First Posted (ESTIMATE)
Study Record Updates
Last Update Posted (ACTUAL)
Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria
Last Verified
More Information
Terms related to this study
Additional Relevant MeSH Terms
Other Study ID Numbers
- CA-002
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 Degenerative Disc Disease
-
Assistance Publique - Hôpitaux de ParisTerminatedCervical Degenerative Disc Disease | Kyphosis | Lumbar Degenerative Disc DiseaseFrance
-
Centinel SpineAvaniaEnrolling by invitationDegenerative Disc Disease | Symptomatic Cervical Disc Disease | Cervical Spine Degenerative Disc Disease | Cervical Spine Degenerative DiseaseGermany
-
Synergy Spine SolutionsMCRAActive, not recruitingCervical Degenerative Disc DiseaseUnited States
-
Orthofix Inc.TerminatedCervical Degenerative Disc DiseaseUnited States
-
Assiut UniversityNot yet recruiting
-
Spine BioPharma, IncMCRAActive, not recruitingLumbar Degenerative Disc DiseaseUnited States
-
AxioMed Spine CorporationUnknownDegenerative Disc Disease (DDD)United States, Germany
-
Synthes USA HQ, Inc.CompletedLumbar Degenerative Disc Disease
-
DePuy InternationalTerminatedCervical Degenerative Disc DiseaseAustralia, Germany, Italy, Malaysia, Netherlands, Spain, United Kingdom
-
Yuhan CorporationCompletedDisc Degenerative DiseaseKorea, Republic of