Loading clinical trials...
Loading clinical trials...
Showing 1-7 of 7 trials
NCT07127380
Background Degenerative disc disease (DDD) is the leading cause of lower back pain and disability, which prevalence increasing with age. When conservative treatment fails, surgical methods of spinal fusion are employed. Minimally invasive techniques, including minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (MIS-TLIF) and midline lumbar interbody fusion (MIDLIF), have well-documented advantages over traditional open transforaminal interbody fusion (open-TLIF). However, data comparing these two minimally invasive methods in treating DDD are minimal and sometimes contradictory. I am running a few minutes late; my previous meeting is running over. Methods This is a prospective, randomized, partially blinded, two-arm trial aiming to compare the outcomes, complications, and treatment costs of MIS-TLIF and MIDLIF in patients with discogenic low back pain. A total of 100 adult patients with lumbosacral spine pain and radicular symptoms, unresponsive to conservative treatment for over one year, will be enrolled. Patients will be randomized (1:1) into two arms: MIS-TLIF (control, n=50) and MIDLIF (intervention, n=50), with a 12-month follow-up. Inclusion criteria include age ≥18 years and discopathy at one or two levels requiring interbody stabilization. Exclusion criteria include multilevel pathology, spinal deformities, and pain causes other than degenerative disease. Primary endpoints assess pain (VAS, NRS scales), disability (COMI, ODI questionnaires), and quality of life (EQ-5D-5L questionnaire) at 1, 3, 6, and 12 months post-surgery. Secondary endpoints include complication rates (nerve root damage, infections), costs (hospitalization, implants), length of hospital stay, procedure duration, blood loss, morphometric parameters (intervertebral space height), and adjacent segment disease based on imaging studies (MRI, CT, X-ray). Data analysis uses parametric/non-parametric tests (e.g., t-test, Mann-Whitney) in the R software. The trial adheres to the Helsinki Declaration, with ethics approval (no. 112/2024). Discussion Data on the comparison of MIDLIF and MIS-TLIF in treating DDD are minimal and inconsistent. Some reports have advantaged MIDLIF in shorter operative time, decreased intraoperative blood loss, and reduced hospital stays, while others favor MIS-TLIF. This trial addresses these gaps by providing high-quality evidence on clinical superiority, cost-effectiveness, and long-term outcomes compering MIDLIF and MIS-TLIF. There is a high need for a high-quality, prospective study to examine this problem.
NCT07363759
This study aimed to investigate a novel technique for intraoperative quantitative and qualitative feedback during discectomy and endplate preparation in TLIF.
NCT06615518
The goal of this clinical trial is to compare the clinical effectiveness of Full Endoscopic Lumbar Discectomy (FELD) and Microdiscectomy (MD) in patients aged 18-85 with single-level lumbar disc herniation who have not undergone prior lumbar surgery. This study also aims to perform a radiological analysis of MRI scans before and after treatment to optimize patient selection and surgical strategies. The main questions it aims to answer are: * Does FELD provide superior early postoperative pain relief (measured by VAS) compared to MD? * Does FELD offer better functional recovery (measured by COMI and ODI scores) postoperatively compared to MD? * Can radiological analysis of pre- and post-operative MRI images help optimize patient qualification and guide surgical strategies? Researchers will compare patients undergoing FELD to those undergoing MD to see if endoscopic techniques result in faster recovery and lower early postoperative pain while maintaining similar long-term outcomes. The study will also analyze how MRI findings correlate with clinical outcomes to refine operative decision-making. Participants will: * Undergo either FELD or MD surgery * Complete VAS, COMI, and ODI questionnaires at pre-specified follow-up intervals (1, 3, 6, and 12 months post-surgery) * Have MRI scans 24 hours before surgery, 24 hours after surgery, and at each follow-up to assess disc recurrence, residual pathology, and to optimize surgical strategies.
NCT06989632
Lumbosciatica is a very prevalent pathology. When conservative treatments fail, surgery should be considered. The traditional surgical treatment is lumbar arthrodesis. The vast majority of patients who undergo spinal fusion cannot return to their same job and a good number of them never work again. Another form of treatment for lumbosciatica is the implantation of a lumbar disc prosthesis. This technique preserves the mobility of the lumbar area that has been operated on. This allows for a greater return to work and a higher percentage of those who return to the same job. This study aims to quantify how many of the patients who have had a lumbar disc prosthesis implanted in the last twenty years have returned to their same job, how many have had to change their jobs, and how many have not returned to work and are now totally or completely disabled from work.
NCT06940453
This will be a prospective, multi-centre study at a National Tertiary Referral Centre for spinal trauma and spinal cord injuries, serving a catchment area of 5 million people. This study will follow patients undergoing anterior lumbar interbody fusion (ALIF) procedure. This trial seeks to evaluate the performance of this CE-marked device, and to assess outcomes in frail and non-frail patient cohorts. The CONDUIT™ ALIF Cage System are intervertebral body fusion devices intended for use for anterior lumbar interbody fusion in skeletally mature patients. The devices are 3D printed cellular titanium implants that feature 80% porous macro-, micro- and nanostructures, are designed to mimic cortical and cancellous bone, and facilitate fusion. This pilot study hypothesizes that the use of CONDUIT ALIF Cage system to treat lumbar degenerative disc disease will achieve results comparable to historical cases using SYNFIX Systems.
NCT06650046
Lumbar degenerative disease is a common disease among middle-aged and elderly people as well as those who sit for a long time, mainly manifested as symptoms such as lower back pain, stiffness, and numbness in the lower limbs. Traditional surgical treatments such as lumbar fusion can alleviate symptoms, but may lead to complications such as adjacent segment degeneration. Therefore, exploring safer and more effective treatment methods is of great significance. Topping off technique, as a new treatment method, combines the advantages of interbody fusion and dynamic fixation, aiming to reduce the pressure on the intervertebral disc at the surgical site, promote the repair of diseased intervertebral discs, while preserving partial mobility of the lumbar spine.The aim of this study is to evaluate the clinical efficacy and imaging changes of Topping off technique in the treatment of lumbar degenerative diseases. The Topping off technique combines posterior lumbar interbody fusion (PLIF) and Wallis interspinous dynamic fixation device implantation. Through prospective clinical trials, its therapeutic effect on patients with continuous double segment lumbar degenerative diseases was observed. The study included patients who underwent surgery for degenerative lumbar diseases in L4-5 and L5-S1, who were treated with two-stage fusion surgery and Topping off technique, respectively. Follow up was conducted before and after surgery, with an average follow-up time of 24 months. Evaluate preoperative and postoperative efficacy using Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), Pain Visual Analog Scale (VAS), and Japanese Orthopaedic Association (JOA) lumbar spine function score, and calculate recovery rate. At the same time, X-ray and MRI images were used to detect the overall range of motion (L2\~S1ROM) of the lumbar spine, the range of motion (ROM) of the Wallis device inserted segments, the intervertebral disc height index (DHI), and the relative signal intensity of the nucleus pulposus (RSI) of the intervertebral disc.
NCT06506500
The study aimed to compare the clinical efficacy and safety of unilateral biportal endoscopic lumbar interbody fusion (ULIF) with posterior lumbar interbody fusion (PLIF) in the treatment of single-level lumbar degenerative diseases.