Lumbar Interbody Fusion Using the Telamon® Peek™ Versus the Telamon® Hydrosorb™ Fusion Device

NCT ID: NCT00095095

Last Updated: 2018-02-13

Study Results

Results pending

The study team has not published outcome measurements, participant flow, or safety data for this trial yet. Check back later for updates.

Basic Information

Get a concise snapshot of the trial, including recruitment status, study phase, enrollment targets, and key timeline milestones.

Recruitment Status

TERMINATED

Clinical Phase

PHASE4

Total Enrollment

102 participants

Study Classification

INTERVENTIONAL

Study Start Date

2004-10-31

Study Completion Date

2006-05-31

Brief Summary

Review the sponsor-provided synopsis that highlights what the study is about and why it is being conducted.

Lumbar spinal fusion is commonly performed as a "last resort" in patients with chronic low back pain caused by degenerative changes and instability of the spine. The aim of this study is to compare two fusion devices, which are used in spinal surgery in order to promote the fusion of two lumbar vertebrae.

Detailed Description

Dive into the extended narrative that explains the scientific background, objectives, and procedures in greater depth.

Lumbar spinal fusion is commonly performed as a "last resort" in patients with chronic low back pain caused by degenerative changes and instability of the spine. The surgical treatment involves the removal of an intervertebral disc, and subsequently the union of the two adjacent intervertebral bodies, such that a bony connection is formed within time after surgery. Lumbar spinal fusion is being performed with increasing frequency. Many interbody fusion methods have been described. In recent years, several types of fusion cages have been developed. These cages are made of various materials: titanium, stainless steel, carbon fiber or polyethylethylketone (Peek). Fusion cages have been quickly integrated into orthopedic practice.

To date, no studies have been conducted that compare the efficacy of nonresorbable and bioresorbable fusion cage devices. In this study the surgical and clinical outcomes are compared of patients with degenerative lumbar spine disorders who undergo lumbar fusion with a nonresorbable versus a bioresorbable fusion cage. Patients with lumbar spinal disorders will be recruited from several European centers and randomly allocated to one of the two intervention groups. In both treatment groups lumbar spinal fusion is performed using a standardized technique.

Patients will be evaluated during two years post-operatively. During this follow up period, the clinical outcome and fusion parameters will be assessed.

Conditions

See the medical conditions and disease areas that this research is targeting or investigating.

Low Back Pain Spondylolisthesis Spinal Stenosis Intervertebral Disc Displacement

Study Design

Understand how the trial is structured, including allocation methods, masking strategies, primary purpose, and other design elements.

Allocation Method

RANDOMIZED

Intervention Model

PARALLEL

Primary Study Purpose

TREATMENT

Blinding Strategy

SINGLE

Interventions

Learn about the drugs, procedures, or behavioral strategies being tested and how they are applied within this trial.

Lumbar Interbody Fusion

Intervention Type DEVICE

Eligibility Criteria

Check the participation requirements, including inclusion and exclusion rules, age limits, and whether healthy volunteers are accepted.

Inclusion Criteria

* Both genders, age between 18 and 70 years
* Chronic low back pain (\> 3 months) with or without leg pain but no signs of motor loss
* Based on clinical history, physical examination, and radiographic signs, pain interpreted as emanating from L4-L5 or L5-S1
* Symptoms refractory to conservative treatment for at least 3 months
* Evidence of degenerative changes at L4-L5 or L5-S1 (spondylosis) on plain radiographs and/or CT scan, and/or MRI. The pathology should be predominant on one level.
* Single-level Posterior Lumbar Interbody Fusion surgery (PLIF) is indicated by the spine surgeon
* Additional posterior fixation is mandatory
* Use of autograft of the iliac crest is possible
* Ability to provide informed consent

Exclusion Criteria

* Previous lumbar spinal fusion
* All other previous spinal surgery except for successful removal of a herniated disc more than 2 years before entering the study
* Symptomatic degenerative disc disorder at more than one lumbar level
* Pregnancy or intention to become pregnant during the two year study
* Ongoing psychiatric illness
* Evidence of alcohol and/or drug abuse
* Inability to complete the questionnaires
* Inability to walk independently
* Other indications than degenerative spinal disorders including a metabolic bone disease, osteoporosis, infection, old fracture, inflammatory process, or neoplasm
* Obvious painful and disabling arthritic hip joints
Minimum Eligible Age

18 Years

Maximum Eligible Age

70 Years

Eligible Sex

ALL

Accepts Healthy Volunteers

No

Sponsors

Meet the organizations funding or collaborating on the study and learn about their roles.

Medtronic Spinal and Biologics

INDUSTRY

Sponsor Role lead

Principal Investigators

Learn about the lead researchers overseeing the trial and their institutional affiliations.

P.I.J.M. Wuisman, MD, PhD

Role: PRINCIPAL_INVESTIGATOR

Amsterdam UMC, location VUmc

Locations

Explore where the study is taking place and check the recruitment status at each participating site.

BG Unfallklinik Halle, Klinik für Neurochirurgie

Halle, , Germany

Site Status

Universität Rostock, Neurochirurgie

Rostock, , Germany

Site Status

VU University Medical Center

Amsterdam, , Netherlands

Site Status

Leids Universitair Medisch Centrum

Leiden, , Netherlands

Site Status

Countries

Review the countries where the study has at least one active or historical site.

Germany Netherlands

References

Explore related publications, articles, or registry entries linked to this study.

Vaccaro AR, Singh K, Haid R, Kitchel S, Wuisman P, Taylor W, Branch C, Garfin S. The use of bioabsorbable implants in the spine. Spine J. 2003 May-Jun;3(3):227-37. doi: 10.1016/s1529-9430(02)00412-6.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 14589204 (View on PubMed)

Tunc DC, van Dijk M, Smit T, Higham P, Burger E, Wuisman P. Three-year follow-up of bioabsorbable PLLA cages for lumbar interbody fusion: in vitro and in vivo degradation. Adv Exp Med Biol. 2004;553:243-55. doi: 10.1007/978-0-306-48584-8_19. No abstract available.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 15503461 (View on PubMed)

Smit TH, Muller R, van Dijk M, Wuisman PI. Changes in bone architecture during spinal fusion: three years follow-up and the role of cage stiffness. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2003 Aug 15;28(16):1802-8; discussion 1809. doi: 10.1097/01.BRS.0000083285.09184.7A.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 12923466 (View on PubMed)

van Dijk M, Smit TH, Arnoe MF, Burger EH, Wuisman PI. The use of poly-L-lactic acid in lumbar interbody cages: design and biomechanical evaluation in vitro. Eur Spine J. 2003 Feb;12(1):34-40. doi: 10.1007/s00586-002-0458-y. Epub 2002 Sep 6.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 12592545 (View on PubMed)

van Dijk M, Smit TH, Burger EH, Wuisman PI. Bioabsorbable poly-L-lactic acid cages for lumbar interbody fusion: three-year follow-up radiographic, histologic, and histomorphometric analysis in goats. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2002 Dec 1;27(23):2706-14. doi: 10.1097/00007632-200212010-00010.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 12461397 (View on PubMed)

Wuisman PI, van Dijk M, Smit TH. Resorbable cages for spinal fusion: an experimental goat model. J Neurosurg. 2002 Nov;97(4 Suppl):433-9. doi: 10.3171/spi.2002.97.4.0433.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 12449197 (View on PubMed)

van Dijk M, Tunc DC, Smit TH, Higham P, Burger EH, Wuisman PI. In vitro and in vivo degradation of bioabsorbable PLLA spinal fusion cages. J Biomed Mater Res. 2002;63(6):752-9. doi: 10.1002/jbm.10466.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 12418020 (View on PubMed)

Wuisman PI, van Dijk M, Smit TH. Resorbable cages for spinal fusion: an experimental goat model. Orthopedics. 2002 Oct;25(10 Suppl):s1141-8. doi: 10.3928/0147-7447-20021002-04.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 12401024 (View on PubMed)

van Dijk M, Smit TH, Sugihara S, Burger EH, Wuisman PI. The effect of cage stiffness on the rate of lumbar interbody fusion: an in vivo model using poly(l-lactic Acid) and titanium cages. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2002 Apr 1;27(7):682-8. doi: 10.1097/00007632-200204010-00003.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 11923659 (View on PubMed)

Toth JM, Estes BT, Wang M, Seim HB 3rd, Scifert JL, Turner AS, Cornwall GB. Evaluation of 70/30 poly (L-lactide-co-D,L-lactide) for use as a resorbable interbody fusion cage. J Neurosurg. 2002 Nov;97(4 Suppl):423-32. doi: 10.3171/spi.2002.97.4.0423.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 12449196 (View on PubMed)

Toth JM, Wang M, Scifert JL, Cornwall GB, Estes BT, Seim HB 3rd, Turner AS. Evaluation of 70/30 D,L-PLa for use as a resorbable interbody fusion cage. Orthopedics. 2002 Oct;25(10 Suppl):s1131-40. doi: 10.3928/0147-7447-20021002-03.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 12401023 (View on PubMed)

Vaccaro AR, Robbins MM, Madigan L, Albert TJ, Smith W, Hilibrand AS. Early findings in a pilot study of anterior cervical fusion in which bioabsorbable interbody spacers were used in the treatment of cervical degenerative disease. Neurosurg Focus. 2004 Mar 15;16(3):E7. doi: 10.3171/foc.2004.16.3.8.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 15198495 (View on PubMed)

Lippman CR, Hajjar M, Abshire B, Martin G, Engelman RW, Cahill DW. Cervical spine fusion with bioabsorbable cages. Neurosurg Focus. 2004 Mar 15;16(3):E4. doi: 10.3171/foc.2004.16.3.5.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 15198492 (View on PubMed)

Krijnen MR, Smit TH, Strijkers GJ, Nicolay K, Pouwels PJ, Wuisman PI. The use of high-resolution magnetic resonance imaging for monitoring interbody fusion and bioabsorbable cages: an ex vivo pilot study. Neurosurg Focus. 2004 Mar 15;16(3):E3. doi: 10.3171/foc.2004.16.3.4.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 15198491 (View on PubMed)

Robbins MM, Vaccaro AR, Madigan L. The use of bioabsorbable implants in spine surgery. Neurosurg Focus. 2004 Mar 15;16(3):E1. doi: 10.3171/foc.2004.16.3.2.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 15198489 (View on PubMed)

Other Identifiers

Review additional registry numbers or institutional identifiers associated with this trial.

NL04-90

Identifier Type: -

Identifier Source: org_study_id

More Related Trials

Additional clinical trials that may be relevant based on similarity analysis.

Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion (TLIF)
NCT04073563 ACTIVE_NOT_RECRUITING NA
Lumbar Fusion With Porous Versus Non-Porous Cages
NCT05583864 ACTIVE_NOT_RECRUITING NA