Cargando…

Evaluation of efficacy of a new hybrid fusion device: a randomized, two-centre controlled trial

BACKGROUND: The 360° fusion of lumbar segments is a common and well-researched therapy to treat various diseases of the spine. But it changes the biomechanics of the spine and may cause adjacent segment disease (ASD). Among the many techniques developed to avoid this complication, one appears promis...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Siewe, Jan, Bredow, Jan, Oppermann, Johannes, Koy, Timmo, Delank, Stefan, Knoell, Peter, Eysel, Peer, Sobottke, Rolf, Zarghooni, Kourosh, Röllinghoff, Marc
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2014
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4161882/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25189113
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1471-2474-15-294
_version_ 1782334613480275968
author Siewe, Jan
Bredow, Jan
Oppermann, Johannes
Koy, Timmo
Delank, Stefan
Knoell, Peter
Eysel, Peer
Sobottke, Rolf
Zarghooni, Kourosh
Röllinghoff, Marc
author_facet Siewe, Jan
Bredow, Jan
Oppermann, Johannes
Koy, Timmo
Delank, Stefan
Knoell, Peter
Eysel, Peer
Sobottke, Rolf
Zarghooni, Kourosh
Röllinghoff, Marc
author_sort Siewe, Jan
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: The 360° fusion of lumbar segments is a common and well-researched therapy to treat various diseases of the spine. But it changes the biomechanics of the spine and may cause adjacent segment disease (ASD). Among the many techniques developed to avoid this complication, one appears promising. It combines a rigid fusion with a flexible pedicle screw system (hybrid instrumentation, “topping off”). However, its clinical significance is still uncertain due to the lack of conclusive data. METHODS/DESIGN: The study is a randomized, therapy-controlled, two-centre trial conducted in a clinical setting at two university hospitals. If they meet the criteria, outpatients presenting with degenerative disc disease, facet joint arthrosis or spondylolisthesis will be included in the study and randomized into two groups: a control group undergoing conventional fusion surgery (PLIF - posterior lumbar intervertebral fusion), and an intervention group undergoing fusion surgery using a new flexible pedicle screw system (PLIF + “topping off”), which was brought on the market in 2013. Follow-up examination will take place immediately after surgery, after 6 weeks and after 6, 12, 24 and 36 months. An ongoing assessment will be performed every year. Outcome measurements will include quality of life and pain assessments using validated questionnaires (ODI - Ostwestry Disability Index, SF-36™ - Short Form Health Survey 36, COMI - Core Outcome Measure Index). In addition, clinical and radiologic ASD, sagittal balance parameters and duration of work disability will be assessed. Inpatient and 6-month mortality, surgery-related data (e.g., intraoperative complications, blood loss, length of incision, surgical duration), postoperative complications (e.g. implant failure), adverse events, and serious adverse events will be monitored and documented throughout the study. DISCUSSION: New hybrid “topping off” systems might improve the outcome of lumbar spine fusion. But to date, there is a serious lack of and a great need of convincing data on safety or efficacy, including benefits and harms to the patients, of these systems. Health care providers are particularly interested in such data as these implants are much more expensive than conventional implants. In such a case, randomized clinical trials are the best way to evaluate benefits and risks. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT01852526
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4161882
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2014
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-41618822014-09-13 Evaluation of efficacy of a new hybrid fusion device: a randomized, two-centre controlled trial Siewe, Jan Bredow, Jan Oppermann, Johannes Koy, Timmo Delank, Stefan Knoell, Peter Eysel, Peer Sobottke, Rolf Zarghooni, Kourosh Röllinghoff, Marc BMC Musculoskelet Disord Study Protocol BACKGROUND: The 360° fusion of lumbar segments is a common and well-researched therapy to treat various diseases of the spine. But it changes the biomechanics of the spine and may cause adjacent segment disease (ASD). Among the many techniques developed to avoid this complication, one appears promising. It combines a rigid fusion with a flexible pedicle screw system (hybrid instrumentation, “topping off”). However, its clinical significance is still uncertain due to the lack of conclusive data. METHODS/DESIGN: The study is a randomized, therapy-controlled, two-centre trial conducted in a clinical setting at two university hospitals. If they meet the criteria, outpatients presenting with degenerative disc disease, facet joint arthrosis or spondylolisthesis will be included in the study and randomized into two groups: a control group undergoing conventional fusion surgery (PLIF - posterior lumbar intervertebral fusion), and an intervention group undergoing fusion surgery using a new flexible pedicle screw system (PLIF + “topping off”), which was brought on the market in 2013. Follow-up examination will take place immediately after surgery, after 6 weeks and after 6, 12, 24 and 36 months. An ongoing assessment will be performed every year. Outcome measurements will include quality of life and pain assessments using validated questionnaires (ODI - Ostwestry Disability Index, SF-36™ - Short Form Health Survey 36, COMI - Core Outcome Measure Index). In addition, clinical and radiologic ASD, sagittal balance parameters and duration of work disability will be assessed. Inpatient and 6-month mortality, surgery-related data (e.g., intraoperative complications, blood loss, length of incision, surgical duration), postoperative complications (e.g. implant failure), adverse events, and serious adverse events will be monitored and documented throughout the study. DISCUSSION: New hybrid “topping off” systems might improve the outcome of lumbar spine fusion. But to date, there is a serious lack of and a great need of convincing data on safety or efficacy, including benefits and harms to the patients, of these systems. Health care providers are particularly interested in such data as these implants are much more expensive than conventional implants. In such a case, randomized clinical trials are the best way to evaluate benefits and risks. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT01852526 BioMed Central 2014-09-05 /pmc/articles/PMC4161882/ /pubmed/25189113 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1471-2474-15-294 Text en © Siewe et al.; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. 2014 This article is published under license to BioMed Central Ltd. 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 credited.
spellingShingle Study Protocol
Siewe, Jan
Bredow, Jan
Oppermann, Johannes
Koy, Timmo
Delank, Stefan
Knoell, Peter
Eysel, Peer
Sobottke, Rolf
Zarghooni, Kourosh
Röllinghoff, Marc
Evaluation of efficacy of a new hybrid fusion device: a randomized, two-centre controlled trial
title Evaluation of efficacy of a new hybrid fusion device: a randomized, two-centre controlled trial
title_full Evaluation of efficacy of a new hybrid fusion device: a randomized, two-centre controlled trial
title_fullStr Evaluation of efficacy of a new hybrid fusion device: a randomized, two-centre controlled trial
title_full_unstemmed Evaluation of efficacy of a new hybrid fusion device: a randomized, two-centre controlled trial
title_short Evaluation of efficacy of a new hybrid fusion device: a randomized, two-centre controlled trial
title_sort evaluation of efficacy of a new hybrid fusion device: a randomized, two-centre controlled trial
topic Study Protocol
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4161882/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25189113
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1471-2474-15-294
work_keys_str_mv AT siewejan evaluationofefficacyofanewhybridfusiondevicearandomizedtwocentrecontrolledtrial
AT bredowjan evaluationofefficacyofanewhybridfusiondevicearandomizedtwocentrecontrolledtrial
AT oppermannjohannes evaluationofefficacyofanewhybridfusiondevicearandomizedtwocentrecontrolledtrial
AT koytimmo evaluationofefficacyofanewhybridfusiondevicearandomizedtwocentrecontrolledtrial
AT delankstefan evaluationofefficacyofanewhybridfusiondevicearandomizedtwocentrecontrolledtrial
AT knoellpeter evaluationofefficacyofanewhybridfusiondevicearandomizedtwocentrecontrolledtrial
AT eyselpeer evaluationofefficacyofanewhybridfusiondevicearandomizedtwocentrecontrolledtrial
AT sobottkerolf evaluationofefficacyofanewhybridfusiondevicearandomizedtwocentrecontrolledtrial
AT zarghoonikourosh evaluationofefficacyofanewhybridfusiondevicearandomizedtwocentrecontrolledtrial
AT rollinghoffmarc evaluationofefficacyofanewhybridfusiondevicearandomizedtwocentrecontrolledtrial