Posterior Ligament Complex Assessment Without Magnetic Resonance Image in Thoracolumbar Fractures

NCT ID: NCT02950532

Last Updated: 2020-08-13

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

COMPLETED

Total Enrollment

60 participants

Study Classification

OBSERVATIONAL

Study Start Date

2016-10-31

Study Completion Date

2018-06-30

Brief Summary

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

The objective of this investigation is to confirm the results obtained in a pilot study showing that certain radiological parameters based on computed tomography (CT) scans seem to reliably detect posterior ligament complex (PLC) injury without the need for Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI)

Detailed Description

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

Integrity of posterior ligament complex (PLC) has an important bearing on the treatment strategies for thoracolumbar (TL) fractures. Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) is the gold standard to confirm PLC injury. The routine use of MRI has its limitations especially since in most trauma centers MRI is not the primary assessment for TL fractures due to reduced availability, increased cost and its adverse applicability in trauma setting and in case of a polytrauma. In contrast computed tomography (CT) scans are an integral part of trauma evaluation protocols, are accurate in spine fracture diagnosis and are performed in less time, making them suitable to assess polytrauma scenarios. In a recent pilot study, a number of radiological parameters based on CT scans have shown to reliably detect PLC injury when compared to MRI. The aim of the study is to reconfirm and validate these CT based parameters to assess PLC injury compared to MRI.

Conditions

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

Spinal Deformity Spinal Fractures Spinal Injuries Kyphosis

Study Design

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

Observational Model Type

COHORT

Study Time Perspective

RETROSPECTIVE

Study Groups

Review each arm or cohort in the study, along with the interventions and objectives associated with them.

Cases

Retrospective radiological evaluation in cases presenting A3 or A4 TL burst fractures (AOSpine classification) between T11 to L2 with or without suspected PLC injury

Retrospective radiological evaluation

Intervention Type OTHER

Radiological evaluation will be performed in already existing imaging exams. Superior-inferior end plate angle (SIEA), vertebral body height (BH), local kyphosis (LK), inter-spinous distance (ISD) and inter-pedicular distance (IPD) will be measured in CT scans and radiographs (if available). PLC injury will be determinated with the gold standard method (MRI).

Interventions

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

Retrospective radiological evaluation

Radiological evaluation will be performed in already existing imaging exams. Superior-inferior end plate angle (SIEA), vertebral body height (BH), local kyphosis (LK), inter-spinous distance (ISD) and inter-pedicular distance (IPD) will be measured in CT scans and radiographs (if available). PLC injury will be determinated with the gold standard method (MRI).

Intervention Type OTHER

Eligibility Criteria

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

Inclusion Criteria

* Age 18 to 60 years
* A3/A4 TL fracture between T11-L2 with or without PLC injury
* Pre-treatment CT scan and MRI. Radiographs (if available)
* Signed Informed consent, if required by EC/IRB

Exclusion Criteria

* Pathological fractures
* Multilevel contiguous and non-contiguous injuries
* Fractures with obvious spinous process split indicating tension band failure such as AO type B1 injuries
* Fractures with translation injuries or dislocations such as AO type C injuries
Minimum Eligible Age

18 Years

Maximum Eligible Age

60 Years

Eligible Sex

ALL

Accepts Healthy Volunteers

No

Sponsors

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

AO Clinical Investigation and Publishing Documentation

OTHER

Sponsor Role lead

Responsible Party

Identify the individual or organization who holds primary responsibility for the study information submitted to regulators.

Responsibility Role SPONSOR

Principal Investigators

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

Shanmuganathan Rajasekaran, Prof. MD

Role: PRINCIPAL_INVESTIGATOR

Ganga Hospital

Test Testing, MD

Role: STUDY_CHAIR

TESTING

Locations

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

The 1st Affiliated Hospital of Zhejiang University

Hangzhou, , China

Site Status

Assiut Universtiy Hospitals

Asyut, , Egypt

Site Status

Ganga Hospital

Coimbatore, , India

Site Status

Uijeongbu St. Mary's Hospital

Uijeongbu-si, , South Korea

Site Status

Royal Victoria Hospital

Belfast, , United Kingdom

Site Status

Countries

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

China Egypt India South Korea United Kingdom

Other Identifiers

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

AOCID_PAM

Identifier Type: -

Identifier Source: org_study_id

More Related Trials

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