Extreme Lateral Interbody FusionFUSION (XLIF) Versus Posterior Lumbar Interbody Fusion (PLIF)
NCT ID: NCT04589572
Last Updated: 2022-05-19
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.
SUSPENDED
NA
40 participants
INTERVENTIONAL
2020-01-01
2023-11-01
Brief Summary
Review the sponsor-provided synopsis that highlights what the study is about and why it is being conducted.
Traditional open posterior lumbar interbody fusion (PLIF) or transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) are used to treat degenerative diseases of the spinal column. These techniques require an extensive dissection of the paraspinal musculature, which in term can lead to muscle denervation, loss of function, muscular atrophy, and spinal instability. It has also been known that paraspinal muscle damage induced during surgery is related to long term disability and pain. With this knowledge, minimally invasive spine surgery began to develop in the mid-twentieth century. Since then, new direct approaches to the lumbar spine, known as lumbar lateral interbody fusion (LLIF), direct lateral interbody fusion (DLIF), or extreme lateral interbody fusion (XLIF), have been introduced.
This study will focus on XLIF. Ozgur. 2006 first reported the XLIF procedure, as a minimally invasive procedure that approaches the spine from the lateral via the space between the 12th rib and the highest point of the iliac crest. This approach allows direct access to the intervertebral disc space without disruption of the peritoneal structures or posterior paraspinal musculature. Ohba. 2017 compared XLIF with percutaneous pedicle screws to traditional PLIF, and found that PLIF was associated with less intraoperative blood loss, postoperative white blood cell (WBC) counts, C-reactive protein (CRP) levels, and creatine kinases (CK) levels, indicating less muscle damage. Postoperative recovery of performance was significantly faster in the XLIF group. 1-year disability and pain scores were also significantly lower in the XLIF group. Despite these significant better results reported in the XLIF group, the systematic review of Barbagallo. 2015 concluded that there is insufficient evidence of the comparative effectiveness of lateral lumbar interbody fusion (XLIF) versus PLIF/ TLIF surgery. This indicates that the evidence for choosing between XLIF or a traditional approach is still scarce, and no recommendations can be made.
This study will focus on comparing XLIF to PLIF. The objective of this study is to compare clinical and structural outcome measures between the XLIF and PLIF groups, to confirm our hypothesis that the minimally invasiveness of the XLIF technique facilitates a significant faster post-operative recovery, and improves functional and structural outcomes.
Related Clinical Trials
Explore similar clinical trials based on study characteristics and research focus.
Comparative Study Between Posterior Lumbar Interbody Fusion(PLIF) and Intertransverse Process Fusion in Treatment of Spodylolithesis
NCT03271060
XLIF® vs. MAS®TLIF for the Treatment of Symptomatic Lumbar Degenerative Spondylolisthesis With or Without Central Stenosis.
NCT01024699
Short-term Clinical Outcome of Cortical Bone Trajectory Compared With the Traditional "Open" and Minimal Invasive Posterior Lumbar Interbody Fusion
NCT05538416
OLIF25™ /OLIF51™ Study
NCT02657421
Long-term Follow-up of the Anterior Lumbar Interbody Fusion Procedure.
NCT01666860
Detailed Description
Dive into the extended narrative that explains the scientific background, objectives, and procedures in greater depth.
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.
RANDOMIZED
PARALLEL
TREATMENT
NONE
Study Groups
Review each arm or cohort in the study, along with the interventions and objectives associated with them.
XLIF - group
XLIF
the XLIF procedure, a minimally invasive procedure that approaches the spine from the lateral via the space between the 12th rib and the highest point of the iliac crest.
PLIF - Group
PLIF
open posterior lumbar interbody fusion (PLIF) or transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) are used to treat degenerative diseases of the spinal column.
Interventions
Learn about the drugs, procedures, or behavioral strategies being tested and how they are applied within this trial.
XLIF
the XLIF procedure, a minimally invasive procedure that approaches the spine from the lateral via the space between the 12th rib and the highest point of the iliac crest.
PLIF
open posterior lumbar interbody fusion (PLIF) or transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) are used to treat degenerative diseases of the spinal column.
Eligibility Criteria
Check the participation requirements, including inclusion and exclusion rules, age limits, and whether healthy volunteers are accepted.
Inclusion Criteria
* Age between 18 and 65 years old
* Understand Dutch (writing and speaking)
* Symptom duration ≤ 5 years
Exclusion Criteria
* Psychiatric pathology/ problems (e.g. substance abuse)
* Pregnancy
* Being non-suitable for surgery
* BMI ≥35
* Other diagnosed neurological or musculoskeletal diseases that might affect the spinal column
* Not being able to function independently (activities of daily living)
18 Years
65 Years
ALL
No
Sponsors
Meet the organizations funding or collaborating on the study and learn about their roles.
Jessa Hospital
OTHER
Sint-Trudo Hospital
OTHER
Sint-Franciscus Ziekenhuis
UNKNOWN
Hasselt University
OTHER
Responsible Party
Identify the individual or organization who holds primary responsibility for the study information submitted to regulators.
Frank Vandenabeele
Principal Investigator
Principal Investigators
Learn about the lead researchers overseeing the trial and their institutional affiliations.
Frank Vandenabeele, prof. dr.
Role: PRINCIPAL_INVESTIGATOR
Hasselt University
Sjoerd stevens, drs.
Role: STUDY_CHAIR
Hasselt University
Locations
Explore where the study is taking place and check the recruitment status at each participating site.
Jessa Ziekenhuis
Hasselt, , Belgium
Sint-Franciscus Ziekenhuis
Heusden-Zolder, , Belgium
Sint-Trudo Ziekenhuis
Sint-Truiden, , Belgium
Countries
Review the countries where the study has at least one active or historical site.
Other Identifiers
Review additional registry numbers or institutional identifiers associated with this trial.
UH-XLIF-001
Identifier Type: -
Identifier Source: org_study_id
More Related Trials
Additional clinical trials that may be relevant based on similarity analysis.