Comparative Study of the Results of Anterior and Posterior Arthrodesis in Degenerative Lumbar Pathology
NCT ID: NCT04115202
Last Updated: 2019-10-03
Study Results
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.
UNKNOWN
254 participants
OBSERVATIONAL
2018-05-31
2020-07-31
Brief Summary
Review the sponsor-provided synopsis that highlights what the study is about and why it is being conducted.
Related Clinical Trials
Explore similar clinical trials based on study characteristics and research focus.
Effects of Osteopathic Management on Disability and Quality of Life After Lumbar Arthrodesis
NCT06802120
Mini-invasive Lumbar Arthrodesis in Ambulatory
NCT04914728
Spinal Approach for Lumbar Active Discopathy
NCT04086199
Instability in the Lumbar Spine of Patients With Age Related Changes and Narrowing of the Spinal Canal (Spinal Stenosis)
NCT04406987
Vertebral Osteosynthesis in Degenerative Lumbar Stenosis With Spondylolisthesis
NCT00252551
Detailed Description
Dive into the extended narrative that explains the scientific background, objectives, and procedures in greater depth.
If lumbar arthrodesis is a recognised solution in the surgical treatment of degenerative diseases of the lumbar spine when they become disabling despite medical treatment, the choice of the operative technique and approach used to achieve it is more dependent of the training that the practitioner benefited from than the guidelines derived from published prospective comparative scientific studies comparing the results of different surgical solutions.
Our hypothesis is that the functional and radiographic results of anterior lumbar arthrodesis techniques by minimally invasive approach may differ from those of conventional posterolateral arthrodesis.
We propose to compare the results of these two surgical techniques within the orthopedic and neurosurgeon team of the Institut Parisien du Dos, mastering these two approaches optimally by leaving them free to use them as they do daily without modifying their procedures. This should allow us to judge, in a well-defined population, whether one of the two techniques is superior to the other when performed by surgeons who are experienced in this surgery.
Conditions
See the medical conditions and disease areas that this research is targeting or investigating.
Study Design
Understand how the trial is structured, including allocation methods, masking strategies, primary purpose, and other design elements.
COHORT
PROSPECTIVE
Study Groups
Review each arm or cohort in the study, along with the interventions and objectives associated with them.
posterior spinal approach group
Lumbar arthrodesis performed by a posterior spinal approach.
lumbar arthrodesis
two approaches anterior versus posterior, optimally by leaving physicians free to use them as they do daily without modifying their procedures
anterior spinal approach group
Lumbar arthrodesis performed by a anterior spinal approach.
lumbar arthrodesis
two approaches anterior versus posterior, optimally by leaving physicians free to use them as they do daily without modifying their procedures
Interventions
Learn about the drugs, procedures, or behavioral strategies being tested and how they are applied within this trial.
lumbar arthrodesis
two approaches anterior versus posterior, optimally by leaving physicians free to use them as they do daily without modifying their procedures
Eligibility Criteria
Check the participation requirements, including inclusion and exclusion rules, age limits, and whether healthy volunteers are accepted.
Inclusion Criteria
* At least 18 years old (no upper age limit).
* Patient with chronic lumbago or lumbar radiculopathy and resistant to a conservative medical treatment sufficiently carried out for at least 6 months, included alongside the usual analgesic, anti-inflammatory, infiltration and rehabilitation contraindications.
* Patient whose lumbar and/or radicular VAS is greater than or equal to 50 mm
* Patient whose Oswestry Index is greater than or equal to 40%
* Patient responding on one anatomical level\* to one of the following diagnoses:
* Spondylolisthesis or degenerative retrolisthesis or
* single stage dislocation on scoliosis or
* degenerative disc disease without true disc herniation, without deformity and instability reaching a single anatomical level
* \*single-stage pathology located between L1 and the sacrum (1 stage = 2 vertebrae and an intervertebral disc).
* Patient with health insurance or beneficiary of a social security scheme
* Patient having been informed of and having agreed to the use of their health data (non-opposition)
Exclusion Criteria
* Contraindication to the strategy under study or an act of evaluation: for example contraindication to imagery provided (Pace maker for MRI).
* Pathology located in L1L2 which against indicates the previous conventional approaches (need to disinsert the diaphragm).
* Patient with proven osteoporosis: femoral T-score \> -2 SD (measurement of the lumbar spine is not relevant because disturbed by osteoarthritic phenomena with vertebral osteo-condensation) and imposing a circumferential arthrodesis: anterior and posterior.
* Patient with excluded disc herniation: hernia that cannot be removed by anterior route (NB: A simple hernia is not a non-inclusion criterion).
* Association with the single-stage pathology another lumbar lesion imposing to extend the act of arthrodesis and/or decompression to one or more spinal stages.
* Any situation that could interfere with the follow-up of this study, i.e. psychological instability, personal situation hindering the follow-up of the study).
* Patient having undergone lumbar surgery less than one year ago
* Protected patients: adults under guardianship, trusteeship or other legal protection, deprived of liberty by judicial or administrative decision
* Pregnant, lactating or parturient women
* Individuals hospitalised without consent.
18 Years
ALL
No
Sponsors
Meet the organizations funding or collaborating on the study and learn about their roles.
Pr Jérome Allain
UNKNOWN
Ramsay Générale de Santé
OTHER
Responsible Party
Identify the individual or organization who holds primary responsibility for the study information submitted to regulators.
Locations
Explore where the study is taking place and check the recruitment status at each participating site.
Geoffroy Saint Hilaire Clinic
Paris, IDF, France
Countries
Review the countries where the study has at least one active or historical site.
Central Contacts
Reach out to these primary contacts for questions about participation or study logistics.
Facility Contacts
Find local site contact details for specific facilities participating in the trial.
Other Identifiers
Review additional registry numbers or institutional identifiers associated with this trial.
2017-A02319-44
Identifier Type: -
Identifier Source: org_study_id
More Related Trials
Additional clinical trials that may be relevant based on similarity analysis.