Radiation Exposure Reduction Protocol for Minimally Invasive Lumbar Decompression (mild) Techniques

October 18, 2024 updated by: Dawood Sayed, MD, University of Kansas Medical Center

A Single-Center Prospective Study Evaluating Efficacy of Radiation Exposure Reduction Protocol for Minimally Invasive Lumbar Decompression (mild) Techniques Including Single Incision Access

To evaluate the efficacy of radiation reduction techniques to minimize clinician and patient exposure during minimally invasive lumbar decompression (MILD) procedure. Additionally, to evaluate the clinical benefits of single incision access for bilateral mild procedure.

Study Overview

Status

Withdrawn

Intervention / Treatment

Study Type

Observational

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

    • Kansas
      • Kansas City, Kansas, United States, 66160
        • University Of Kansas Medical Center

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

  • Older Adult

Accepts Healthy Volunteers

No

Sampling Method

Probability Sample

Study Population

Individuals 65 years or older experiencing lumbar spinal stenosis

Description

Inclusion Criteria:

  • Age > 65 years old
  • Patient has meets eligibility criteria for (mild)
  • Patient has signed study-specific informed consent form
  • Patient has the necessary mental capacity to participate and is physically able to comply with study protocol requirements
  • Patient has medical insurance that covers this standard of care procedure and all other anticipated and unanticipated procedure related care.

Exclusion Criteria:

  • Patient does not meet criteria for mild
  • Patient is unable to receive radiation exposure.
  • Current local or systemic infection that raises the risk of surgery
  • Patient currently receiving or seeking worker's compensation, disability remuneration, and/or involved in injury litigation.
  • Currently pregnant
  • Known or suspected drug or alcohol abuse
  • Diagnosed psychiatric disease (e.g., schizophrenia, major depression, personality disorders) that could interfere with study participation
  • Patient is participating in an investigational study or has been involved in an investigational study within 3 months prior to evaluation for participation
  • Implanted intrathecal pain pump or spinal cord stimulator system in place
  • Patient who has received other means pain management with minimally invasive implantable devices (spacer, sacroiliac joint (SIJ) fusion, etc).
  • Patient with physical inability to ambulate independently, otherwise.
  • Patient underlying neurologic pathology preventing safe independent ambulation.

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
Pulsed Fluoroscopy
Patients in the study group will receive pulsed (8 frames/second) fluoroscopy for the entirety of the procedure
Pulsed or Continuous fluoroscopy during MILD procedure
Continuous Fluoroscopy
Non-study arm patients will receive continuous fluoroscopy for the entire procedure
Pulsed or Continuous fluoroscopy during MILD procedure

What is the study measuring?

Primary Outcome Measures

Outcome Measure
Measure Description
Time Frame
Pulsed fluoroscopy can reduce radiation exposure to clinicians and patients compared to continuous fluoroscopy
Time Frame: During surgery
Compare patient outcome in the study group receiving pulsed (8 frames/second) fluoroscopy for the entirety of the procedure to non-study arm patients who will receive continuous fluoroscopy for the entire procedure.
During surgery
Genetic factors can explain individual differences in pain severity and the response to MILD (with and without pulsed fluoroscopy)
Time Frame: Up to 6 months post-surgery
We will store, run and analyze buccal cell samples for pain-related genetic variations (polymorphisms). Buccal cell samples will be collected at baseline/time of recruitment for this study.
Up to 6 months post-surgery

Secondary Outcome Measures

Outcome Measure
Measure Description
Time Frame
Average rate of complications
Time Frame: During surgery
Average rate of complications is comparable for Pulsed fluoroscopy from mild procedure compared to continuous fluoroscopy
During surgery
Duration of surgery
Time Frame: During surgery
Compare difference in duration of the mild procedure utilizing Pulsed fluoroscopy compared to continuous fluoroscopy.
During surgery
Patient BMI
Time Frame: During surgery
Compare use of pulsed fluoroscopy depending on patient BMI
During surgery
Difference in average Visual Analogue Scale (VAS)
Time Frame: Up to 6 months post-treatment
Compare difference in average VAS between Pulsed fluoroscopy and continuous fluoroscopy post mild procedure
Up to 6 months post-treatment
Single Nucleotide Polymorphisms (SNPs) within pain-relevant genes will be predictive of pre-surgical pain severity prior to MILD
Time Frame: Up to 6 months post-treatment
Compare genetic expression profile to pain severity self report pre surgery
Up to 6 months post-treatment
Single Nucleotide Polymorphisms (SNPs) within pain and/or analgesia relevant genes will be predictive of pain relief following MILD (with continuous or pulsed fluoroscopy).
Time Frame: Up to 6 months post-treatment
Compare genetic expression profile to pain severity self report post surgery
Up to 6 months post-treatment
Establish patient "profile of risk"
Time Frame: Up to 6 months post-treatment
The pattern of gene expression (i.e. the transcriptome) within lumbar hypertrophic tissue can be used to establish a patient "profile of risk" for pre-surgical pain severity, pain relief response to MILD, and recurrence of hypertrophic tissue following the MILD procedure (with continuous or pulsed fluoroscopy).
Up to 6 months post-treatment

Collaborators and Investigators

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

Investigators

  • Principal Investigator: Dawood Sayed, MD, University Of Kansas Medical Center

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)

June 9, 2020

Primary Completion (Actual)

June 14, 2022

Study Completion (Actual)

June 14, 2022

Study Registration Dates

First Submitted

December 22, 2020

First Submitted That Met QC Criteria

October 18, 2024

First Posted (Actual)

October 21, 2024

Study Record Updates

Last Update Posted (Actual)

October 21, 2024

Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria

October 18, 2024

Last Verified

October 1, 2024

More Information

Terms related to this study

Drug and device information, study documents

Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated drug product

No

Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated device product

No

product manufactured in and exported from the U.S.

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 Lumbar Spinal Stenosis

Clinical Trials on Fluoroscopy

Subscribe