CONDUISE V. CAGES PEEK
Conduit vs cages Peek chez les patients subissant une fusion interbody latérale directe (DLIF): un essai prospectif randomisé
In this study, the Principal Investigator aim to compare the clinical and radiographic outcomes of patients with degenerative lumbar disease undergoing direct lateral interbody fusion (DLIF) using two different types of lateral interbody cages: PEEK cages combined with rhBMP-2 versus CONDUIT cages. This will be a randomized, prospective, open-label clinical trial. By examining these two groups, the PI hope to determine whether PEEK cages with rhBMP-2 and CONDUIT cages are equally effective for DLIF procedures. The findings from this study will help us optimize the surgical approach for future patients undergoing DLIF.
Aperçu de l'étude
Statut
Les conditions
Intervention / Traitement
Description détaillée
Direct lateral interbody fusion (DLIF) is a powerful surgical tool in a spine surgeon's armamentarium to address lumbar spine pathology minimally invasively. It has been widely adopted amongst spine surgeons to gain access to the lumbar disc through a small incision on a patient's flank. Through a retroperitoneal approach, the surgeon can perform discectomy, prep end plates, and insert an interbody cage with a much longer (lateral-medial) and wider (anterior-posterior) footprint than posterior lumbar interbody fusion (PLIF). Using either transpsoas or anterior-to-psoas (ATP) technique, the surgeons are now able to address lumbar spine pathologies affecting L2 to S1 minimally invasively. Both approaches are acceptable and widely adopted amongst spine surgeons. There are many commercially available FDA-approved DLIF cages in market for spine surgeons to use. The cages made of polyetheretherketone (PEEK) and titanium are most commonly used. Many surgeons who use PEEK cages in DLIF supplement the construct with recombinant human bone morphogenic protein-2 (rhBMP-2) to achieve fusion. PEEK has an inert and hydrophobic property which does not induce osteogenesis. In-vitro studies demonstrate absence of bone formation through PEEK. By adding rhBMP-2, it may induce robust osteoinduction around PEEK, achieving fusion across disk space over time. On the other hand, porous titanium has all three properties: osteoconductivity, osteoinductivity, and osseointegration. This may create a more favorable environment for fusion, which obviates the need for rhBMP-2 supplementation. Both types of cages are approved for the study's indications and are routinely used in DLIF at Penn. The surgical staff is qualified to implant both devices.
Aside from the type of cage used, subjects' DLIF procedures will not be altered for the purposes of the study. There are no known differences in the risks and benefits of the two cages being studied. Cage choice in routine care is based on each individual surgeon's standard-of-care preference. As such, there is a possibility of the patient getting either of these cages placed, should they choose to not participate in the study.
Type d'étude
Inscription (Réel)
Phase
- N'est pas applicable
Contacts et emplacements
Lieux d'étude
-
-
Pennsylvania
-
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, États-Unis, 19107
- Pennsylvania Hospital
-
-
Critères de participation
Critère d'éligibilité
Âges éligibles pour étudier
- Enfant
- Adulte
- Adulte plus âgé
Accepte les volontaires sains
Sexes éligibles pour l'étude
La description
Inclusion Criteria:
-
• Patients with one to two consecutive level lumbar degenerative disease from L2to S1, including Grade 1 (<25%) Spondylolisthesis
- Patients undergoing direct lateral interbody fusion (transpsoas or anterior-to-psoas approach) for lumbar disease
- Skeletally mature patients, aged 18 and older
- Patients able to fully comply with the clinical protocol and adhere to the follow-up schedule and protocol requirements
- Patients able to understand and sign the study-specific, IRB approved informed consent form
Exclusion Criteria:
-
• Spondylolisthesis greater than Grade 1
-
Traumatic lumbar disease
-
Spinal Deformity
- Coronal Cobb angle greater than 40 degrees
- Severe sagittal imbalance
-
Existing fusion construct longer than 2 consecutive levels
-
Active infection - systemic or local
-
Tumor diagnosis
-
Untreated osteoporosis, defined as T Spine < -2.5 on DEXA scan
-
Active smoking habit
-
Current incarceration
-
Pregnancy
-
Involvement in an active spinal litigation
-
Plan d'étude
Comment l'étude est-elle conçue ?
Détails de conception
- Objectif principal: Traitement
- Répartition: Randomisé
- Modèle interventionnel: Affectation parallèle
- Masquage: Seul
Armes et Interventions
Groupe de participants / Bras |
Intervention / Traitement |
|---|---|
|
Autre: Conduit
Patients undergoing DLIf (transposons or anterior-to-psoas approach) will be randomized to PEEK cages + rhBMP-2 vs. CONDUIT cages to compare the clinical outcomes and determine the associated cost. |
Comparison between cages to determine the effectiveness and cost related to the study procedures. |
|
Autre: PEEK + rh-BMP-2 cage
Patients undergoing DLIf (transposons or anterior-to-psoas approach) will be randomized to PEEK cages + rhBMP-2 vs. CONDUIT cages to compare the clinical outcomes and determine the associated cost. |
Comparison between cages to determine the effectiveness and cost related to the study procedures. |
Que mesure l'étude ?
Principaux critères de jugement
Mesure des résultats |
Description de la mesure |
Délai |
|---|---|---|
|
Clinical outcomes
Délai: 24 months
|
Difference in fusion rates for patients who get the PEEK + rh-BMP-2 cage and those who get the CONDUIT cage. |
24 months
|
|
ODI scores
Délai: 24 months
|
The ODI is comprised of ten items with associated statements for the patient to select which reflect the patient's ability to manage their everyday life while dealing with their pain. Each of the ten items in the ODI has six statements from which patients are requested to select one. This allows scoring from 0-5 for each item. A maximum score of 50 is possible. The score obtained by individual patients can be multiplied by 2, and this will provide a percentage score |
24 months
|
Mesures de résultats secondaires
Mesure des résultats |
Description de la mesure |
Délai |
|---|---|---|
|
Cost
Délai: 24 months
|
Costs associated with the PEEK + rh-BMP-2 and CONDUIT cages will be assessed. |
24 months
|
Collaborateurs et enquêteurs
Parrainer
Dates d'enregistrement des études
Dates principales de l'étude
Début de l'étude (Réel)
Achèvement primaire (Réel)
Achèvement de l'étude (Réel)
Dates d'inscription aux études
Première soumission
Première soumission répondant aux critères de contrôle qualité
Première publication (Réel)
Mises à jour des dossiers d'étude
Dernière mise à jour publiée (Réel)
Dernière mise à jour soumise répondant aux critères de contrôle qualité
Dernière vérification
Plus d'information
Termes liés à cette étude
Autres numéros d'identification d'étude
- 844964
Plan pour les données individuelles des participants (IPD)
Prévoyez-vous de partager les données individuelles des participants (DPI) ?
Informations sur les médicaments et les dispositifs, documents d'étude
Étudie un produit pharmaceutique réglementé par la FDA américaine
Étudie un produit d'appareil réglementé par la FDA américaine
Ces informations ont été extraites directement du site Web clinicaltrials.gov sans aucune modification. Si vous avez des demandes de modification, de suppression ou de mise à jour des détails de votre étude, veuillez contacter register@clinicaltrials.gov. Dès qu'un changement est mis en œuvre sur clinicaltrials.gov, il sera également mis à jour automatiquement sur notre site Web .