Cervical Radiculopathy Trial (CRT)

A Randomised Controlled Trial Comparing the Effectiveness of Surgical and Nonsurgical Treatment for Cervical Radiculopathy

The primary aim of the present project is to compare the effectiveness of surgery and nonsurgical treatment in patients with cervical radiculopathy caused by either disc herniation or spondylosis. Secondary aims are to evaluate cost-effectiveness and predicting factors of success of the two treatments, and to explore the terms success rate and expectations by asking the patients to fill in their expected primary outcome score at baseline.

Study Overview

• Status: Active, not recruiting
• Conditions: Cervical Radiculopathy
• Intervention / Treatment: Procedure: Anterior discectomy; Behavioral: Conservative treatment

Detailed Description

Cervical radiculopathy is usually caused by disc herniation or spondylosis. Prognosis is expected to be good in most patients but there is limited scientific evidence about the indication for non-surgical and surgical treatment.

Two randomised controlled trials comparing cervical decompression and non-operative treatment with cost-effectiveness analysis and assessment of expectations and predictors of outcome. The main research question will be evaluated at one-year follow-up.

1. To test the hypothesis that the effectiveness of surgery as measured by the change in Neck Disability Index (NDI) and arm pain at 1-year follow-up in patients with cervical radiculopathy is not different from non-surgical treatment in:

   1. Study 1: one level disc herniation (C5/6 or C6/7)
   2. Study 2: one or two level spondylosis (C5/6 and/or C6/7)
2. To test the hypothesis that surgery is more effective in patients with more clinical finding (dermatomal sensory loss, myotonal weakness and reflex disturbance) at baseline when adjusted for other possible predictors such as age, gender, baseline pain, duration, radiological findings, expectations, and psychological factors).
3. To estimate cost-effectiveness for health care costs and societal costs (including sickness absence) in surgical versus non-surgical patients.
4. To assess radiological (MRI and CT) measurements of foraminal area and nerve compression and if changes can predict clinical changes (NDI and arm pain) at 1-year .
5. To evaluate treatment outcome expectations at baseline asking the patients to fill in their expected improvement.

• Study Type: Interventional
• Enrollment (Actual): 180
• Phase: Not Applicable

Contacts and Locations

• Study Contact: Name: Mirad Taso, MD; Phone Number: +4793838735; Email: mirtas@ous-hf.no
• Study Contact Backup: Name: Jon Håvard Sommernes, MD; Phone Number: +4790823849; Email: haasom@ous-hf.no

Study Locations

• Norway
  • Oslo, Norway, 0424
    • Oslo University Hospital

Participation Criteria

Eligibility Criteria

• Ages Eligible for Study: 18 years to 65 years (Adult, Older Adult)
• Accepts Healthy Volunteers: Yes

Description

Inclusion Criteria:

• Age 20 to 65 years.
• Study 1: Neck and arm pain for at least 3 months with a corresponding herniation involving one cervical nerve root (C6 or C7) Study 2: Neck and arm pain for at least 3 months with a corresponding spondylosis involving C6 and/or C7) .
• Pain intensity of arm pain of at least 4 on a scale from 0 (no pain) to 10 (worst possible pain)
• Willing to accept either of the treatment alternatives
• NDI > 30

Exclusion Criteria:

• Patients with any previous cervical fractures or cervical spine surgery;
• Signs of myelopathy;
• Rapidly progressive paresis or paresis < grade 4;
• Pregnancy;
• Arthritis involving the cervical spine;
• Infection or active cancer;
• Generalised pain syndrome;
• Serious psychiatric or somatic disease that exclude one of the treatment alternatives;
• Concomitant shoulder disorders that may interfere with outcome;
• Abuse of medication/narcotics,
• Not able to understand written Norwegian,
• Not willing to accept one of the treatment alternatives.

Study Plan

How is the study designed?

Design Details

• Primary Purpose: Treatment
• Allocation: Randomized
• Interventional Model: Parallel Assignment
• Masking: Double

Number of Arms

2

Arms and Interventions

Participant Group / Arm	Intervention / Treatment
Active Comparator: Surgical treatment; Anterior discectomy	Procedure: Anterior discectomy; Anterior discectomy will be performed and a microscope is used. After separation of the platysma muscle the pre-vertebral space is reached by an approach medial to the sternocleido-mastoid muscle and the carotid artery and lateral to the trachea and oesophagus. Then the disc is incided and the corpora are distracted to perform discectomy. Usually the posterior ligament is cut and the spinal root is decompressed and if necessary the arthritic rims are removed. An inter-vertebral fusion device is inserted, two levels are allowed in the spondylosis study.
Active Comparator: Conservative treatment; Patients will attend an experienced specialist in physical medicine and rehabilitation and a physiotherapist.	Behavioral: Conservative treatment; Patients will first attend an experienced specialist in physical medicine and rehabilitation who will answer concerns and questions and if necessary repeat the information given before inclusion. The aim of the brief intervention is to promote better understanding and coping of the condition. The intervention will include supervision by a physiotherapist (6 sessions altogether) and provide advice on how to handle secondary neck muscle pain and dysfunction, reduce eventual fear avoidance, and advice to stay active.

What is the study measuring?

Primary Outcome Measures

Outcome Measure	Measure Description	Time Frame
Neck Disability Index	Consists of ten questions about pain related disability and include items such as by example headache, concentration, reading and sleep. Each item is rated by choosing one of five response categories and transformed to a total score from 0 to 100 (worst possible). The Norwegian version has been validated in patients with neck pain and with cervical radiculopathy.	Follow-up at 52 weeks is the primary end point.
Arm pain	Arm pain measured by Numeric Rating Scale (NRS) from 0 (no pain to 10 (worst imaginable pain).	Follow-up at 52 weeks is the primary end point.

Secondary Outcome Measures

Outcome Measure	Measure Description	Time Frame
Neck pain	Neck pain measured by Numeric Rating Scale (NRS) from 0 (no pain to 10 (worst imaginable pain).	52 weeks
EuroQol (EQ-5D-5L and EQ-VAS)	EQ-5D-5L includes five domains: mobility; self-care, daily activities, pain/discomfort, and anxiety/depression and each has three response categories. The responses are transformed into and index to value the patients' health related quality of life for the cost utility analyses. Patients score their health from 0 (as bad as possible) to 100 (best possible) by EQ-VAS. The Norwegian version has been validated in patients with back pain, idiopathic scoliosis, and cervical radiculopathy.	52 weeks
Fear-avoidance beliefs	Evaluated with the Fear Avoidance Beliefs Questionnaire	52 weeks
Emotional distress	Assessed by the 10-question version of the Hopkins Symptom Check List	52 weeks
Perceived recovery	Perceived recovery or change of the main symptom rated on a numeric scale ranging from -9 (worst possible change) to 9 (best possible change)	52 weeks
Sickness absence data	Sickness absence data will be collected from the National Social Security Institution for the year before and after inclusion.	52 weeks
Dysphagia	As recorded by The Dysphagia Short Questionnaire	52 weeks
Medicine consumption	Questions related to pain medication usage.	52 weeks
Patient expectations	Exploring patient expectations ahead of treatment. The patients are asked to fill out the Neck Disability Index pretending they are at 52 weeks post treatment and selecting the lowest category they would be content with for each item. The patients are also asked to report what they expect their symptoms to be like 52 weeks ahead (ranging from much worse to much better), registered for arm pain, neck pain and headache separately.	At inclusion
Success rate	Exploring global success rate by asking the patients about how the arm pain and neck pain is compared to prior to treatment (ranging from much worse to much better).	52 weeks

Collaborators and Investigators

• Sponsor: Oslo University Hospital
• Investigators: Study Chair: Jens Ivar Brox, MD PhD, Oslo University Hospital

Publications and helpful links

General Publications

• Taso M, Sommernes JH, Kolstad F, Sundseth J, Bjorland S, Pripp AH, Zwart JA, Brox JI. A randomised controlled trial comparing the effectiveness of surgical and nonsurgical treatment for cervical radiculopathy. BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2020 Mar 16;21(1):171. doi: 10.1186/s12891-020-3188-6.

Study record dates

Study Major Dates

• Study Start (Actual): October 19, 2018
• Primary Completion (Estimated): January 31, 2028
• Study Completion (Estimated): January 31, 2028

Study Registration Dates

• First Submitted: September 14, 2018
• First Submitted That Met QC Criteria: September 14, 2018
• First Posted (Actual): September 17, 2018

Study Record Updates

• Last Update Posted (Actual): March 8, 2024
• Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria: March 5, 2024
• Last Verified: March 1, 2024

More Information

Terms related to this study

• Additional Relevant MeSH Terms: Nervous System Diseases; Neuromuscular Diseases; Peripheral Nervous System Diseases; Radiculopathy
• Other Study ID Numbers: 2017/2125

Drug and device information, study documents

• Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated drug product: No
• Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated device product: No