Instr. vs. Non-instr. Posterolateral Spinal Fusion in Patients With Spinal Stenosis and Degenerative Listhesis

March 28, 2022 updated by: Andreas Kiilerich Andresen, Spine Centre of Southern Denmark

Instrumented vs. Non-instrumented Posterolateral Spinal Fusion in Patients With Spinal Stenosis and Degenerative Listhesis

The aim of this study is to determine, in patients with grade 1 degenerative spondylolisthesis with spinal stenosis, if decompression and lumbar spinal fusion with, or without supplementary pedicle screw fixation yields an improved patient reported outcome.

Study Overview

Detailed Description

Lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS) is a common disease with a large impact on the quality of life of the patient. LSS is defined as narrowing of the spinal canal, nerve root canal or intervertebral foramina. Spinal stenosis is caused by degenerative changes in the lumbar spine, including thickening of the ligamentum flavum, osteophyte formation and disc protrusion. Pain is worse with standing upright and with exercise, and relieved with spine flexion or sitting down.

In the Wakayama Spine Study, investigators found radiographic severe spinal stenosis, defined as narrowing of more than two-thirds of the spinal canal area, in 30,4% of all patients, but only 17,5% were symptomatic.

Many of the patients suffering from LSS are pensioners, with an average age of 65 years. With current changes in demographics and the aging global population it is estimated that prevalence of LSS will increase to nearly 60% by 2025.

In a Danish epidemiological study, degenerative spondylolisthesis was found in 2,7% of men and 8,4% of women above 50 years. Every year, more than 3500 patients aged 60 and above are referred to Center of Spine Surgery Middelfart for LSS. According to the national Danish surgical spine database, DaneSpine, 7936 patients with LSS had surgery during a period from 2009-2013.

Patients suffering from LSS and instability are treated with decompression and posterolateral spinal fusion with or without instrumentation. According to DaneSpine, this group of patients showed improvements on both physical and psychological parameters. In countries outside of Scandinavia, these patients are usually treated with decompression and posterolateral spinal fusion with supplementary pedicle screw fixation. Instrumentation with pedicle screws and rods provides an internal splint, preventing motion during fusion healing. The fusion rate in non-instrumented arthrodesis is reported to be as low as 30-45% In contrast the fusion rate with instrumented arthrodesis have been reported to be above 80%. Although some studies have shown similar outcomes after decompression with or without instrumentation, long-term follow up has shown that a solid fusion improves clinical outcome.

In recent retrospective studies, the spinal sagittal balance, specifically the sagittal vertical axis (SVA) has been shown to affect the outcome of patients undergoing laminectomy. Decompression surgery has been shown to improve sagittal balance in patients with a preoperative imbalance, compared to patients treated with rehabilitation. The preoperative sagittal imbalance has not been shown to significantly affect health-related quality of life(HRQoL)outcomes although a residual imbalance after decompression is related to a poorer outcome. No prospective studies to our knowledge have compared the sagittal balance and outcomes in patients with spinal stenosis and spondylolisthesis, treated with decompression and spinal fusion with or without supplemental pedicle screw fixation.

Study Type

Interventional

Enrollment (Actual)

104

Phase

  • Not Applicable

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

      • Middelfart, Denmark, 5500
        • Spine Center of Southern Denmark

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

58 years and older (Adult, Older Adult)

Accepts Healthy Volunteers

No

Genders Eligible for Study

All

Description

Inclusion Criteria:

  • Patients diagnosed with Lumbar Spinal stenosis, with neurogenic claudication, radicular pain and,
  • Confirmatory MRI scan showing lumbar spinal stenosis on 1-2 levels from L1-S1
  • Standing X-ray showing grade 1 spondylolisthesis on one level
  • Age 60 and above
  • Symptom duration of 3+ months

Exclusion Criteria:

  • Stenosis caused by herniated disc
  • Prior vertebral compression fracture in the affected segments
  • Active malignancy
  • Current fracture, infection og deformity of the spine
  • Stenosis on 3 or more levels
  • MMSE test score below 24
  • Neuromuscular disease
  • Obligatory peroral steroid treatment
  • ASA grade 3 or more.

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 Assignment
  • Masking: Double

Arms and Interventions

Participant Group / Arm
Intervention / Treatment
Active Comparator: Non-instrumented arm
Decompression with concomitant non-instrumented posterolateral fusion with autologous(obtained from the decompression) and allogenic bone graft.
Posterolateral fusion with autologous and allogenic bone graft.
Other Names:
  • Decompression on affected level
Experimental: Instrumented arm
Decompression with concomitant instrumented posterolateral fusion with autologous(obtained from the decompression) and allogenic bone graft and supplementary pedicle screw fixation.
Posterolateral fusion with autologous and allogenic bone graft with supplementary pedicle screw fixation.
Other Names:
  • Decompression on affected level

What is the study measuring?

Primary Outcome Measures

Outcome Measure
Measure Description
Time Frame
Oswestry Disability Index(ODI)
Time Frame: 2 years after surgery
A disease specific measure of physical disability in an index score ranging from 0-100, 0 being the best possible outcome and 100 being the worst. Comparing the effectiveness of the two arms.
2 years after surgery

Secondary Outcome Measures

Outcome Measure
Measure Description
Time Frame
Achieved solid posterolateral fusion
Time Frame: CT-scans 1 year after surgery
Fine cut CT-scans, evaluated by 3 observers to determine if solid posterolateral fusion is achieved.
CT-scans 1 year after surgery
Change in sagittal balance, effect on outcome.
Time Frame: Pre operative, 1 and 2 years after surgery
Lateral scoliosis X-rays obtained pre operatively and after 1 and 2 years.
Pre operative, 1 and 2 years after surgery
European Quality of life - 5 Dimensions (EQ-5D)
Time Frame: preoperative, 3, 12 and 24 months after surgery
Changes in quality of life in the study groups, Obtained preoperatively, after 3 months, 1 year and 2 years. Scores range between -0.6 to 1.0 where 1 is perfect health.
preoperative, 3, 12 and 24 months after surgery
Difference in cost-effectiveness between instrumented versus non-instrumented fusion.
Time Frame: 2 years after surgery.
Additional cost of instrumentation, incidence of revision surgery and treatment effectiveness, measured by health state utilities. Measured in Quality adjusted Life years(QaLY) and cost of surgery measured in American dollars.
2 years after surgery.

Other Outcome Measures

Outcome Measure
Measure Description
Time Frame
Zurich Claudication Questionnaire
Time Frame: Preoperative, 1 and 2 years after surgery.
Disease specific patient reported outcome, to measure changes in function. The result is expressed as a percentage of the maximum possible score. The score increases with worsening disability.
Preoperative, 1 and 2 years after surgery.
NRS score for leg- and back pain.
Time Frame: Properative, 1 and 2 years after surgery.
Patient reported leg and back pain. Obtained preoperatively, after 3 months, 1 year and 2 years. Score is 0-100, the score increases with worsening pain.
Properative, 1 and 2 years after surgery.

Collaborators and Investigators

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

Investigators

  • Principal Investigator: Andreas K Andresen, MD, University of Southern Denmark

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 (Actual)

January 1, 2017

Primary Completion (Actual)

December 1, 2021

Study Completion (Actual)

December 1, 2021

Study Registration Dates

First Submitted

November 4, 2019

First Submitted That Met QC Criteria

November 14, 2019

First Posted (Actual)

November 18, 2019

Study Record Updates

Last Update Posted (Actual)

March 31, 2022

Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria

March 28, 2022

Last Verified

March 1, 2022

More Information

Terms related to this study

Plan for Individual participant data (IPD)

Plan to Share Individual Participant Data (IPD)?

Yes

IPD Plan Description

All individual patient data that underlies the results reported in this article, after deidentification. (texts, tables, figures)

IPD Sharing Time Frame

6 months after publication of articles and ending after 36 months.

IPD Sharing Access Criteria

Researchers who provide a sound methodological proposal. Proposals should be addressed to andreas.andresen@rsyd.dk

IPD Sharing Supporting Information Type

  • Study Protocol

Drug and device information, study documents

Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated drug product

No

Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated device product

No

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 Spinal Stenosis

Clinical Trials on Non-instrumented posterolateral spine fusion.

3
Subscribe