Prospective Evaluation of Complex Adult Spinal Deformity (CAD) Treated With Minimally Invasive Surgery (MIS)

Prospective Evaluation of Complex Adult Spinal Deformity (CAD) Treated With Minimally Invasive Surgery (MIS)

Evaluate surgical treatment outcomes and identify best practice guidelines for complex adult spinal deformity (ASD) patients treated with minimally invasive approach, including radiographic and clinical outcomes, surgical and postoperative complications, risk factors for and revision surgery rates, and the role of standard work to improve patient outcomes and reduce surgical and postoperative complications.

Study Overview

Detailed Description

Specific Aims:

  • Evaluate surgical treatment outcomes and identify best practice guidelines for complex adult spinal deformity (ASD) patients treated with minimally invasive approach, including radiographic and clinical outcomes, surgical and postoperative complications, risk factors for and revision surgery rates, and the role of standard work to improve patient outcomes and reduce surgical and postoperative complications.

    a. Complex ASD patients will be defined based upon clinical, radiographic and/or procedural criteria.

  • Develop and validate a standardized, universal complications classification system for minimally invasive spine surgery
  • Evaluate perioperative blood management approaches, transfusion requirements, including variance in thresholds for blood transfusion and associated complications for minimally invasive adult spinal deformity surgery
  • Evaluate clinical outcomes utilizing legacy patient reported outcome measures (PROMs) including Scoliosis Research Society 22r (SRS 22r) modified Oswestry Disability Index (mODI), Veterans RAND-12 (VR-12), and numeric pain rating scale (NRS), and patient reported outcome measurement information system (PROMIS).
  • Evaluate clinical outcomes stratifying by patient chronological and physiological age
  • Evaluate the cost for episode of care for minimally invasive CADS surgery and cost per QALY gain compared to open surgery for CADS
  • Evaluate the contribution of patient frailty to patient outcomes, cost of care, disability, and complications
  • Evaluate incidence of and risk factors for mental health (MH) compromise among ASD patients treated with MIS techniques, and establish best practice guidelines for assessing MH
  • Evaluate the association of MH with surgical complications, outcomes, hospital length of stay and cost for MIS ASD surgery
  • Evaluate the association of social health surgical complications, outcomes, hospital length of stay and cost for MIS ASD surgery and risk factors for routine (home) discharge vs. skilled nursing facility (SNF)/rehabilitation facility
  • Broaden the evaluation of the minimally invasive surgically treated ASD patient to maximize evaluation of the entirety of the episode of care to include steps that can be taken prior to surgery including "prehabilitation," pain management, and MH care to improve treatment outcomes, reduce cost, reduce hospital length of stay, reduce non-routing discharge and reduce early and late complications
  • Establish a core set of standard work guidelines to clinically and radiographically evaluate and treat ASD patients and evaluate the utility of standard work to improve outcomes for ASD and formulate best practice guidelines for minimally invasive surgical treatment of ASD
  • Evaluate the use of robotic techniques in minimally invasive spine surgery for ASD, and its impact on radiographic parameters and clinical outcomes
  • Evaluate the use of expandable cages in minimally invasive spine surgery for ASD, and its impact on radiographic parameters and clinical outcomes
  • Evaluate the OR efficiency, morbidity of surgery, and cost per episode of care relating to single-position vs. multi-position CADS surgery
  • Evaluate the prevalence and incidence of sacroiliac pain before/after complex adult spinal deformity surgery.

Study Type

Observational

Enrollment (Estimated)

500

Contacts and Locations

This section provides the contact details for those conducting the study, and information on where this study is being conducted.

Study Contact

Study Contact Backup

Study Locations

    • Arizona
      • Phoenix, Arizona, United States, 85013
        • Recruiting
        • Barrow Neurological Institute
        • Principal Investigator:
          • Juan Uribe, MD
        • Sub-Investigator:
          • Jay Turner, MD
        • Contact:
    • California
      • La Jolla, California, United States, 92037
        • Recruiting
        • Shiley Center for Orthopaedic Research and Education at Scripps Clinic
        • Contact:
        • Principal Investigator:
          • Gregory Mundis, MD
        • Sub-Investigator:
          • Robert Eastlack, MD
      • Los Angeles, California, United States, 90048
        • Recruiting
        • Cedars-Sinai Medical Center
        • Contact:
        • Principal Investigator:
          • Neel Anand, MD
      • San Francisco, California, United States, 94143
        • Recruiting
        • University of California - San Francisco Medical Center
        • Contact:
        • Principal Investigator:
          • Praveen Mummaneni, MD
    • Florida
      • Miami, Florida, United States, 33125
        • Recruiting
        • University of Miami
        • Principal Investigator:
          • Micahael Wang, MD
        • Contact:
    • Illinois
      • Chicago, Illinois, United States, 60612
        • Recruiting
        • Rush University, Department of Neurosurgery
        • Principal Investigator:
          • Richard Fessler, MD
        • Contact:
    • Louisiana
      • Shreveport, Louisiana, United States, 71101
        • Recruiting
        • Louisiana Spine Institute
        • Principal Investigator:
          • Pierce Nunley, MD
        • Contact:
    • Michigan
      • Ann Arbor, Michigan, United States, 48109
        • Completed
        • University of Michigan, Department of Neurosurgery
    • New York
      • New York, New York, United States, 10034
        • Recruiting
        • Columbia University - New York-Presbyterian Och Spine Hospital
        • Principal Investigator:
          • Dean Chou, MD
        • Contact:
    • North Carolina
      • Durham, North Carolina, United States, 27710
        • Recruiting
        • Duke University Health System
        • Principal Investigator:
          • Khoi Than, MD
        • Contact:
    • Pennsylvania
      • Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, United States, 15213
        • Recruiting
        • University of Pittsburgh Medical Center
        • Contact:
        • Sub-Investigator:
          • Kojo Hamilton, MD
        • Principal Investigator:
          • David Okonkwo, MD
    • Tennessee
      • Memphis, Tennessee, United States, 38120

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

18 years and older (Adult, Older Adult)

Accepts Healthy Volunteers

No

Sampling Method

Non-Probability Sample

Study Population

Multi-center, prospective, non-randomized analysis of surgically treated complex adult spinal deformity (ASD) patients

Description

Inclusion Criteria:

1. >18 years of age at the time of treatment 2. Diagnosis of adult congenital, degenerative, idiopathic, neuromuscular, inflammatory or iatrogenic spinal deformity 3. EOS full body or standing 36" AP & Lateral images of entire spine 4. Surgery to be schedule to take place within 6 months (otherwise PROMs/Radiographic images to be recollected) 5. Surgery to include > 3 levels percutaneous posterior spinal instrumentation or 3 level stand-alone lateral 6. And any one of the following:

a. Radiographic criteria incorporating percutaneous posterior spinal instrumentation: i. PI-LL ≥ 25 degrees ii. Thoracolumbar/lumbar scoliosis ≥ 20 degrees iii. SVA >10cm iv. PT > 30 b. Procedural criteria: i. Single-position surgery ≥ 3 levels fused (Levels=vertebra; S1 is counted as a level; S2 &/or pelvis/ilium is not) ii. Staged ≥ 3 levels fused with percutaneous pedicle screws iii. 3 column osteotomy with percutaneous fixation iv. ACR incorporating open or percutaneous fixation

Exclusion Criteria:

  1. Deformity due to acute trauma
  2. Active spine tumor or infection
  3. Patient is unwilling or unable to complete questionnaires
  4. Women who are pregnant
  5. Prisoners -

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

Cohorts and Interventions

Group / Cohort
Intervention / Treatment
Operative
Multicenter, prospective, nonrandomized analysis of ASD patients w/diagnosis of congenital, degenerative, idiopathic, neuromuscular, inflammatory or iatrogenic spinal deformity. Participants must be scheduled to have 3 or more levels of Percutaneous posterior spinal instrumentation or 3 level stand alone lateral surgery within next 6 months.
Surgical interventions will be patient specified by treating surgeon.

What is the study measuring?

Primary Outcome Measures

Outcome Measure
Measure Description
Time Frame
Scoliosis Research Society (SRS) 22r
Time Frame: Change from Preop to 3 months and 1, 2, 5 & 10 year follow-up
Scoliosis specific patient reported outcome
Change from Preop to 3 months and 1, 2, 5 & 10 year follow-up
Veterans RAND 12 Item Health Survey (VR-12)
Time Frame: Change from Preop to 3 months and 1, 2, 5 & 10 year follow-up
Patient reported outcome
Change from Preop to 3 months and 1, 2, 5 & 10 year follow-up
Visual Analog Scale - Back Pain
Time Frame: Change from Preop to 3 months and 1, 2, 5 & 10 year follow-up
Self-reported back pain on scale of 0 (No pain) to 10 (severe pain)
Change from Preop to 3 months and 1, 2, 5 & 10 year follow-up
Oswestry Disability Index (ODI)
Time Frame: Change from Preop to 3 months and 1, 2, 5 & 10 year follow-up
Spine specific patient reported outcome
Change from Preop to 3 months and 1, 2, 5 & 10 year follow-up
Radiographic Evaluation
Time Frame: Change from Preop to 3 months and 1, 2, 5 & 10 year follow-up
Cobb angles, Coronal & Sagittal balance, spinopelvic measures
Change from Preop to 3 months and 1, 2, 5 & 10 year follow-up
Patient-Reported Outcome Measurement Information System (PROMIS) - Anxiety
Time Frame: Change from Preop to 3 months and 1, 2, 5 & 10 year follow-up
Computer adaptive Patient reported outcome
Change from Preop to 3 months and 1, 2, 5 & 10 year follow-up
Patient-Reported Outcome Measurement Information System (PROMIS) - Depression
Time Frame: Change from Preop to 3 months and 1, 2, 5 & 10 year follow-up
Computer adaptive Patient reported outcome
Change from Preop to 3 months and 1, 2, 5 & 10 year follow-up
Patient-Reported Outcome Measurement Information System (PROMIS) - Pain Interference
Time Frame: Change from Preop to 3 months and 1, 2, 5 & 10 year follow-up
Computer adaptive Patient reported outcome
Change from Preop to 3 months and 1, 2, 5 & 10 year follow-up
Patient-Reported Outcome Measurement Information System (PROMIS) - Physical Function
Time Frame: Change from Preop to 3 months and 1, 2, 5 & 10 year follow-up
Computer adaptive Patient reported outcome
Change from Preop to 3 months and 1, 2, 5 & 10 year follow-up
Patient-Reported Outcome Measurement Information System (PROMIS) - Social Satisfaction
Time Frame: Change from Preop to 3 months and 1, 2, 5 & 10 year follow-up
Computer adaptive Patient reported outcome
Change from Preop to 3 months and 1, 2, 5 & 10 year follow-up
Patient-Reported Outcome Measurement Information System (PROMIS) - Social Role Satisfaction
Time Frame: Change from Preop to 3 months and 1, 2, 5 & 10 year follow-up
Computer adaptive Patient reported outcome
Change from Preop to 3 months and 1, 2, 5 & 10 year follow-up
Visual Analog Scale - Leg pain
Time Frame: Change from Preop to 3 months and 1, 2, 5 & 10 year follow-up
Self-reported leg pain on scale of 0 (No pain) to 10 (severe pain)
Change from Preop to 3 months and 1, 2, 5 & 10 year follow-up

Secondary Outcome Measures

Outcome Measure
Measure Description
Time Frame
Edmonton Frail Scale
Time Frame: Change from Preop to 3 months and 1, 2, 5 & 10 year follow-up]
Evaluate frailty on scale of 0 to 17 where higher scores mean more frail
Change from Preop to 3 months and 1, 2, 5 & 10 year follow-up]
Canadian Study of Health and Aging (CSHA)
Time Frame: Change from Preop to 3 months and 1, 2, 5 & 10 year follow-up]
Frailty scale of 1 to 9; higher scores mean more frail
Change from Preop to 3 months and 1, 2, 5 & 10 year follow-up]
Adverse Events
Time Frame: Change from Preop to 3 months and 1, 2, 5 & 10 year follow-up]
Occurrence of Adverse events meeting reporting criteria and their relationship to intervention throughout the study
Change from Preop to 3 months and 1, 2, 5 & 10 year follow-up]

Collaborators and Investigators

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

Collaborators

Investigators

  • Principal Investigator: Praveen Mummaneni, MD, University of San Francisco
  • Principal Investigator: Paul Park, MD, University of Michigan
  • Principal Investigator: Gregory Mundis, MD, Scripps Clinic, Department of Orthopedic Surgery, La Jolla, CA
  • Principal Investigator: Juan Uribe, MD, Barrow Neurological Institute, Phoenix, AZ

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)

July 28, 2021

Primary Completion (Estimated)

December 31, 2034

Study Completion (Estimated)

December 31, 2034

Study Registration Dates

First Submitted

May 10, 2021

First Submitted That Met QC Criteria

May 10, 2021

First Posted (Actual)

May 13, 2021

Study Record Updates

Last Update Posted (Estimated)

March 5, 2024

Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria

March 4, 2024

Last Verified

March 1, 2024

More Information

Terms related to this study

Plan for Individual participant data (IPD)

Plan to Share Individual Participant Data (IPD)?

NO

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 Scoliosis

Clinical Trials on Index or spine revision surgery for complex adult spinal deformity

3
Subscribe