Cargando…
Cost-effectiveness of decompression according to Gill versus instrumented spondylodesis in the treatment of sciatica due to low grade spondylolytic spondylolisthesis: A prospective randomised controlled trial [NTR1300]
BACKGROUND: Nerve root decompression with instrumented spondylodesis is the most frequently performed surgical procedure in the treatment of patients with symptomatic low-grade spondylolytic spondylolisthesis. Nerve root decompression without instrumented fusion, i.e. Gill's procedure, is an al...
Autores principales: | , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BioMed Central
2008
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2570682/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18822175 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1471-2474-9-128 |
_version_ | 1782160166879232000 |
---|---|
author | Arts, Mark P Verstegen, Marco JT Brand, Ronald Koes, Bart W Akker, M Elske van den Peul, Wilco C |
author_facet | Arts, Mark P Verstegen, Marco JT Brand, Ronald Koes, Bart W Akker, M Elske van den Peul, Wilco C |
author_sort | Arts, Mark P |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: Nerve root decompression with instrumented spondylodesis is the most frequently performed surgical procedure in the treatment of patients with symptomatic low-grade spondylolytic spondylolisthesis. Nerve root decompression without instrumented fusion, i.e. Gill's procedure, is an alternative and less invasive approach. A comparative cost-effectiveness study has not been performed yet. We present the design of a randomised controlled trial on cost-effectiveness of decompression according to Gill versus instrumented spondylodesis. METHODS/DESIGN: All patients (age between 18 and 70 years) with sciatica or neurogenic claudication lasting more than 3 months due to spondylolytic spondylolisthesis grade I or II, are eligible for inclusion. Patients will be randomly allocated to nerve root decompression according to Gill, either unilateral or bilateral, or pedicle screw fixation with interbody fusion. The main primary outcome measure is the functional assessment of the patient measured with the Roland Disability Questionnaire for Sciatica at 12 weeks and 2 years. Other primary outcome measures are perceived recovery and intensity of leg pain and low back pain. The secondary outcome measures include, incidence of re-operations, complications, serum creatine phosphokinase, quality of life, medical consumption, costs, absenteeism, work perception, depression and anxiety, and treatment preference. The study is a randomised prospective multicenter trial in which two surgical techniques are compared in a parallel group design. Patients and research nurse will not be blinded during the follow-up period of 2 years. DISCUSSION: Currently, nerve root decompression with instrumented fusion is the golden standard in the surgical treatment of low-grade spondylolytic spondylolisthesis, although scientific proof justifying instrumented spondylodesis over simple decompression is lacking. This trial is designed to elucidate the controversy in best surgical treatment of symptomatic patients with low-grade spondylolytic spondylolisthesis. |
format | Text |
id | pubmed-2570682 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2008 |
publisher | BioMed Central |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-25706822008-10-22 Cost-effectiveness of decompression according to Gill versus instrumented spondylodesis in the treatment of sciatica due to low grade spondylolytic spondylolisthesis: A prospective randomised controlled trial [NTR1300] Arts, Mark P Verstegen, Marco JT Brand, Ronald Koes, Bart W Akker, M Elske van den Peul, Wilco C BMC Musculoskelet Disord Study Protocol BACKGROUND: Nerve root decompression with instrumented spondylodesis is the most frequently performed surgical procedure in the treatment of patients with symptomatic low-grade spondylolytic spondylolisthesis. Nerve root decompression without instrumented fusion, i.e. Gill's procedure, is an alternative and less invasive approach. A comparative cost-effectiveness study has not been performed yet. We present the design of a randomised controlled trial on cost-effectiveness of decompression according to Gill versus instrumented spondylodesis. METHODS/DESIGN: All patients (age between 18 and 70 years) with sciatica or neurogenic claudication lasting more than 3 months due to spondylolytic spondylolisthesis grade I or II, are eligible for inclusion. Patients will be randomly allocated to nerve root decompression according to Gill, either unilateral or bilateral, or pedicle screw fixation with interbody fusion. The main primary outcome measure is the functional assessment of the patient measured with the Roland Disability Questionnaire for Sciatica at 12 weeks and 2 years. Other primary outcome measures are perceived recovery and intensity of leg pain and low back pain. The secondary outcome measures include, incidence of re-operations, complications, serum creatine phosphokinase, quality of life, medical consumption, costs, absenteeism, work perception, depression and anxiety, and treatment preference. The study is a randomised prospective multicenter trial in which two surgical techniques are compared in a parallel group design. Patients and research nurse will not be blinded during the follow-up period of 2 years. DISCUSSION: Currently, nerve root decompression with instrumented fusion is the golden standard in the surgical treatment of low-grade spondylolytic spondylolisthesis, although scientific proof justifying instrumented spondylodesis over simple decompression is lacking. This trial is designed to elucidate the controversy in best surgical treatment of symptomatic patients with low-grade spondylolytic spondylolisthesis. BioMed Central 2008-09-28 /pmc/articles/PMC2570682/ /pubmed/18822175 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1471-2474-9-128 Text en Copyright © 2008 Arts et al; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0 This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License ( (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0) ), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. |
spellingShingle | Study Protocol Arts, Mark P Verstegen, Marco JT Brand, Ronald Koes, Bart W Akker, M Elske van den Peul, Wilco C Cost-effectiveness of decompression according to Gill versus instrumented spondylodesis in the treatment of sciatica due to low grade spondylolytic spondylolisthesis: A prospective randomised controlled trial [NTR1300] |
title | Cost-effectiveness of decompression according to Gill versus instrumented spondylodesis in the treatment of sciatica due to low grade spondylolytic spondylolisthesis: A prospective randomised controlled trial [NTR1300] |
title_full | Cost-effectiveness of decompression according to Gill versus instrumented spondylodesis in the treatment of sciatica due to low grade spondylolytic spondylolisthesis: A prospective randomised controlled trial [NTR1300] |
title_fullStr | Cost-effectiveness of decompression according to Gill versus instrumented spondylodesis in the treatment of sciatica due to low grade spondylolytic spondylolisthesis: A prospective randomised controlled trial [NTR1300] |
title_full_unstemmed | Cost-effectiveness of decompression according to Gill versus instrumented spondylodesis in the treatment of sciatica due to low grade spondylolytic spondylolisthesis: A prospective randomised controlled trial [NTR1300] |
title_short | Cost-effectiveness of decompression according to Gill versus instrumented spondylodesis in the treatment of sciatica due to low grade spondylolytic spondylolisthesis: A prospective randomised controlled trial [NTR1300] |
title_sort | cost-effectiveness of decompression according to gill versus instrumented spondylodesis in the treatment of sciatica due to low grade spondylolytic spondylolisthesis: a prospective randomised controlled trial [ntr1300] |
topic | Study Protocol |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2570682/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18822175 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1471-2474-9-128 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT artsmarkp costeffectivenessofdecompressionaccordingtogillversusinstrumentedspondylodesisinthetreatmentofsciaticaduetolowgradespondylolyticspondylolisthesisaprospectiverandomisedcontrolledtrialntr1300 AT verstegenmarcojt costeffectivenessofdecompressionaccordingtogillversusinstrumentedspondylodesisinthetreatmentofsciaticaduetolowgradespondylolyticspondylolisthesisaprospectiverandomisedcontrolledtrialntr1300 AT brandronald costeffectivenessofdecompressionaccordingtogillversusinstrumentedspondylodesisinthetreatmentofsciaticaduetolowgradespondylolyticspondylolisthesisaprospectiverandomisedcontrolledtrialntr1300 AT koesbartw costeffectivenessofdecompressionaccordingtogillversusinstrumentedspondylodesisinthetreatmentofsciaticaduetolowgradespondylolyticspondylolisthesisaprospectiverandomisedcontrolledtrialntr1300 AT akkermelskevanden costeffectivenessofdecompressionaccordingtogillversusinstrumentedspondylodesisinthetreatmentofsciaticaduetolowgradespondylolyticspondylolisthesisaprospectiverandomisedcontrolledtrialntr1300 AT peulwilcoc costeffectivenessofdecompressionaccordingtogillversusinstrumentedspondylodesisinthetreatmentofsciaticaduetolowgradespondylolyticspondylolisthesisaprospectiverandomisedcontrolledtrialntr1300 |