Laminectomy Alone Versus Laminectomy and Fusion for Traumatic Cervical Spinal Cord Injury Without Instability

NCT ID: NCT05360524

Last Updated: 2022-06-29

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

ACTIVE_NOT_RECRUITING

Clinical Phase

NA

Total Enrollment

42 participants

Study Classification

INTERVENTIONAL

Study Start Date

2022-05-01

Study Completion Date

2025-12-01

Brief Summary

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

The aim of study is to compare clinical and radiological outcomes of laminectomy alone to laminectomy and fusion in the treatment of traumatic cervical spinal cord injury without instability.

Detailed Description

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

Cervical spinal cord injury (CSCI) without instability tends to be caused by a hyperextension force to the neck. This type of injury has been increasing as the elderly population is dramatically increasing.

Although surgery has become the preferred method for management of traumatic unstable cervical spine injury, the treatment of spinal cord injury (SCI) without instability such as fracture, dislocation, and ligamentous injury, however, remains controversial.

Before deciding for surgical or conservative treatment, one should understand the pathophysiology of SCI. Traumatic SCI is dependent on primary damage, such as the dynamic mechanistic force and static pre-existing or concurrent cord compression, and secondary damage, such as edema, ischemia, and inflammation, which lead to demyelination of axons, apoptosis of neural cells, and glial scar formation in the spinal cord.

Advocates of conservative treatment believe that decompression is not effective here, because the compression may have existed before the injury in asymptomatic patients. Therefore, the symptoms develop after a CSCI without instability are probably not a result of the compression itself. On the other hands advocates of surgical treatment believe that decompression could prevent secondary cord damage due to the vicious cycle of "ischemia-edema-ischemia". However, faced with a patient with neurologic dysfunction MRI evidence of cervical spinal cord compression, decompressive surgery is a practical treatment option.

Since these injuries are stable, why to add fusion to laminectomy when it is possible to perform laminectomy only with expected less operative time, blood loss and restriction of neck motion (compared to laminectomy with fusion). Instrumented fusions also entail the risks of screw misplacement, pseudoarthrosis, distal junction kyphosis, and adjacent segment pathology.

Multi-level laminectomy compromises the posterior tension band and increases the mobility of the neck, resulting in post laminectomy kyphosis and potential dynamic injury to the spinal cord . In contrast, spinal instrumentation and fusion helps to eliminate movement at the treated levels and reduce spinal cord tension with less incidence of kyphosis.

Conditions

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

Cervical Spinal Cord Injury

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

NONE

Study Groups

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

Laminectomy alone in patients with traumatic cervical spinal cord injury without instability

laminectomy only with expected less operative time, blood loss and restriction of neck motion (compared to laminectomy with fusion). Instrumented fusions also entail the risks of screw misplacement, pseudoarthrosis, distal junction kyphosis, and adjacent segment pathology.

Group Type ACTIVE_COMPARATOR

Laminectomy alone versus laminectomy and fusion

Intervention Type PROCEDURE

laminectomy only with expected less operative time, blood loss and restriction of neck motion (compared to laminectomy with fusion). Instrumented fusions also entail the risks of screw misplacement, pseudoarthrosis, distal junction kyphosis, and adjacent segment pathology.

Multi-level laminectomy compromises the posterior tension band and increases the mobility of the neck, resulting in post laminectomy kyphosis and potential dynamic injury to the spinal cord . In contrast, spinal instrumentation and fusion helps to eliminate movement at the treated levels and reduce spinal cord tension with less incidence of kyphosis.

Laminectomy and fusion in patients with traumatic cervical spinal cord injury without instability

Multi-level laminectomy compromises the posterior tension band and increases the mobility of the neck, resulting in post laminectomy kyphosis and potential dynamic injury to the spinal cord . In contrast, spinal instrumentation and fusion helps to eliminate movement at the treated levels and reduce spinal cord tension with less incidence of kyphosis.

Group Type ACTIVE_COMPARATOR

Laminectomy alone versus laminectomy and fusion

Intervention Type PROCEDURE

laminectomy only with expected less operative time, blood loss and restriction of neck motion (compared to laminectomy with fusion). Instrumented fusions also entail the risks of screw misplacement, pseudoarthrosis, distal junction kyphosis, and adjacent segment pathology.

Multi-level laminectomy compromises the posterior tension band and increases the mobility of the neck, resulting in post laminectomy kyphosis and potential dynamic injury to the spinal cord . In contrast, spinal instrumentation and fusion helps to eliminate movement at the treated levels and reduce spinal cord tension with less incidence of kyphosis.

Interventions

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

Laminectomy alone versus laminectomy and fusion

laminectomy only with expected less operative time, blood loss and restriction of neck motion (compared to laminectomy with fusion). Instrumented fusions also entail the risks of screw misplacement, pseudoarthrosis, distal junction kyphosis, and adjacent segment pathology.

Multi-level laminectomy compromises the posterior tension band and increases the mobility of the neck, resulting in post laminectomy kyphosis and potential dynamic injury to the spinal cord . In contrast, spinal instrumentation and fusion helps to eliminate movement at the treated levels and reduce spinal cord tension with less incidence of kyphosis.

Intervention Type PROCEDURE

Eligibility Criteria

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

Inclusion Criteria

* Patients with traumatic cervical spine cord injury admitted to Assiut University Hospital - Department of Orthopaedic and Trauma Surgery regardless of age, mechanism of injury or neurological status changes.

Exclusion Criteria

1. Associated cervical spine bony or ligamentous injury.
2. Associated primary focal anterior compression of the cervical spinal cord (clear disc herniation).
3. Associated head injury.
4. Kyphotic cervical spine as measured by C2-C7 Cobb angle on X-ray.
5. Previous surgery of the cervical spine.
6. Patients who refuse to participate in the study
7. Patients who are mentally incompetent or unable to comply with the one year follow up regimen
Eligible Sex

ALL

Accepts Healthy Volunteers

No

Sponsors

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

Assiut University

OTHER

Sponsor Role lead

Responsible Party

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

Mahmoud Sayed Hamed Mohammed

Physician

Responsibility Role PRINCIPAL_INVESTIGATOR

Principal Investigators

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

Khaled Mohamed Hassan, Professor

Role: STUDY_CHAIR

Assiut University

Locations

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

Faculty of Medicine Assiut University

Asyut, , Egypt

Site Status

Countries

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

Egypt

References

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

Kawano O, Ueta T, Shiba K, Iwamoto Y. Outcome of decompression surgery for cervical spinal cord injury without bone and disc injury in patients with spinal cord compression: a multicenter prospective study. Spinal Cord. 2010 Jul;48(7):548-53. doi: 10.1038/sc.2009.179. Epub 2010 Jan 12.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 20065985 (View on PubMed)

Chikuda H, Ohtsu H, Ogata T, Sugita S, Sumitani M, Koyama Y, Matsumoto M, Toyama Y; OSCIS investigators. Optimal treatment for spinal cord injury associated with cervical canal stenosis (OSCIS): a study protocol for a randomized controlled trial comparing early versus delayed surgery. Trials. 2013 Aug 7;14:245. doi: 10.1186/1745-6215-14-245.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 23924165 (View on PubMed)

McDonald JW, Sadowsky C. Spinal-cord injury. Lancet. 2002 Feb 2;359(9304):417-25. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(02)07603-1.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 11844532 (View on PubMed)

Lee HJ, Kim HS, Nam KH, Han IH, Cho WH, Choi BK. Neurologic Outcome of Laminoplasty for Acute Traumatic Spinal Cord Injury without Instability. Korean J Spine. 2013 Sep;10(3):133-7. doi: 10.14245/kjs.2013.10.3.133. Epub 2013 Sep 30.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 24757474 (View on PubMed)

Passias PG, Vasquez-Montes D, Poorman GW, Protopsaltis T, Horn SR, Bortz CA, Segreto F, Diebo B, Ames C, Smith J, LaFage V, LaFage R, Klineberg E, Shaffrey C, Bess S, Schwab F; ISSG. Predictive model for distal junctional kyphosis after cervical deformity surgery. Spine J. 2018 Dec;18(12):2187-2194. doi: 10.1016/j.spinee.2018.04.017. Epub 2018 Apr 27.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 29709551 (View on PubMed)

Fehlings MG, Santaguida C, Tetreault L, Arnold P, Barbagallo G, Defino H, Kale S, Zhou Q, Yoon TS, Kopjar B. Laminectomy and fusion versus laminoplasty for the treatment of degenerative cervical myelopathy: results from the AOSpine North America and International prospective multicenter studies. Spine J. 2017 Jan;17(1):102-108. doi: 10.1016/j.spinee.2016.08.019. Epub 2016 Sep 3.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 27597512 (View on PubMed)

ASIA and ISCoS International Standards Committee. The 2019 revision of the International Standards for Neurological Classification of Spinal Cord Injury (ISNCSCI)-What's new? Spinal Cord. 2019 Oct;57(10):815-817. doi: 10.1038/s41393-019-0350-9. Epub 2019 Sep 17. No abstract available.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 31530900 (View on PubMed)

Other Identifiers

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

Laminectomy vs fusion

Identifier Type: -

Identifier Source: org_study_id

More Related Trials

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

LUMBAR & SACROILIAC FUSION STUDY
NCT07204288 RECRUITING NA