Comparison of standard fusion with a "topping off" system in lumbar spine surgery: a protocol for a randomized controlled trial

被引:13
作者
Siewe, Jan [1 ,2 ]
Otto, Christina [1 ]
Knoell, Peter [1 ]
Koriller, Marco [1 ,4 ]
Stein, Gregor [1 ]
Kaulhausen, Thomas [1 ]
Eysel, Peer [1 ]
Zarghooni, Kourosh [1 ]
Franklin, Jeremy [3 ]
Sobottke, Rolf [1 ]
机构
[1] Univ Cologne, Dept Orthopaed & Trauma Surg, D-50924 Cologne, Germany
[2] Univ Cologne, BMBF 01KN0706, Clin Trials Ctr, D-50924 Cologne, Germany
[3] Univ Cologne, Inst Med Stat Informat & Epidemiol, D-50937 Cologne, Germany
[4] Univ Cologne, Inst Hlth Econ & Clin Epidemiol, D-50935 Cologne, Germany
关键词
ADJACENT SEGMENT DEGENERATION; LOW-BACK-PAIN; OSWESTRY DISABILITY INDEX; NONSURGICAL TREATMENT; STABILIZATION; DISEASE; OSTEOARTHRITIS; MULTICENTER; OUTCOMES;
D O I
10.1186/1471-2474-12-239
中图分类号
R826.8 [整形外科学]; R782.2 [口腔颌面部整形外科学]; R726.2 [小儿整形外科学]; R62 [整形外科学(修复外科学)];
学科分类号
摘要
Background: Fusion of lumbar spine segments is a well-established therapy for many pathologies. The procedure changes the biomechanics of the spine. Initial clinical benefits may be outweighed by ensuing damage to the adjacent segments. Various surgical devices and techniques have been developed to prevent this deterioration. "Topping off" systems combine rigid fusion with a flexible pedicle screw system to prevent adjacent segment disease (ASD). To date, there is no convincing evidence that these devices provide any patient benefits. Methods/Design: The study is designed as a randomized, therapy-controlled trial in a clinical care setting at a university hospital. Patients presenting to the outpatient clinic with degenerative disc disease or spondylolisthesis will be assessed against study inclusion and exclusion criteria. After randomization, the control group will undergo conventional fusion. The intervention group will undergo fusion with a supplemental flexible pedicle screw system to protect the adjacent segment ("topping off"). Follow-up examination will take place immediately after treatment during hospital stay, after 6 weeks, and then after 6, 12, 24 and 36 months. Subsequently, ongoing assessments will be performed annually. Outcome measurements will include quality of life and pain assessments using questionnaires (SF-36 (TM), ODI, COMI). In addition, clinical and radiologic ASD, work-related disability, and duration of work disability will be assessed. Inpatient and 6-month mortality, surgery-related data (e.g., intraoperative complications, blood loss, length of incision, surgical duration), postoperative complications, adverse events, and serious adverse events will be documented and monitored throughout the study. Cost-effectiveness analysis will also be provided. Discussion: New hybrid systems might improve the outcome of lumbar spine fusion. To date, there is no convincing published data on effectiveness or safety of these topping off systems. High quality data is required to evaluate the benefits and drawbacks of topping off devices. If only because these devices are quite expensive compared to conventional fusion implants, nonessential use should be avoided. In fact, these high costs necessitate efforts by health care providers to evaluate the effects of these implants. Randomized clinical trials are highly recommended to evaluate the benefits or harm to the patient.
引用
收藏
页数:7
相关论文
共 29 条
[1]  
AOTA Y, 1995, J SPINAL DISORD, V8, P464, DOI 10.1097/00002517-199512000-00008
[2]   Interspinous process devices in the lumbar spine [J].
Bono, Christopher M. ;
Vaccaro, Alexander R. .
JOURNAL OF SPINAL DISORDERS & TECHNIQUES, 2007, 20 (03) :255-261
[3]   Elastic stabilization alone or combined with rigid fusion in spinal surgery: a biomechanical study and clinical experience based on 82 cases [J].
Caserta, S ;
La Maida, GA ;
Misaggi, B ;
Peroni, D ;
Pietrabissa, R ;
Raimondi, MT ;
Redaelli, A .
EUROPEAN SPINE JOURNAL, 2002, 11 (Suppl 2) :S192-S197
[4]   Adjacent segment disease following lumbar/thoracolumbar fusion with pedicle screw instrumentation - A minimum 5-year follow-up [J].
Cheh, Gene ;
Bridwell, Keith H. ;
Lenke, Lawrence G. ;
Buchowski, Jacob M. ;
Daubs, Michael D. ;
Kim, Yongjung ;
Baldus, Christy .
SPINE, 2007, 32 (20) :2253-2257
[5]   Minimum clinically important difference in lumbar spine surgery patients: a choice of methods using the Oswestry Disability Index, Medical Outcomes Study questionnaire Short Form 36, and Pain Scales [J].
Copay, Anne G. ;
Glassman, Steven D. ;
Subach, Brian R. ;
Berven, Sigurd ;
Schuler, Thomas C. ;
Carreon, Leah Y. .
SPINE JOURNAL, 2008, 8 (06) :968-974
[6]   Randomised controlled trial to compare surgical stabilisation of the lumbar spine with an intensive rehabilitation programme for patients with chronic low back pain: the MRC spine stabilisation trial [J].
Fairbank, J ;
Frost, H ;
Wilson-MacDonald, J ;
Yu, LM ;
Barker, K ;
Collins, R .
BMJ-BRITISH MEDICAL JOURNAL, 2005, 330 (7502) :1233-1239
[7]   2001 Volvo Award winner in clinical studies:: Lumbar fusion versus nonsurgical treatment for chronic low back pain -: A multicenter randomized controlled trial from the Swedish Lumbar Spine Study Group [J].
Fritzell, P ;
Hägg, O ;
Wessberg, P ;
Nordwall, A .
SPINE, 2001, 26 (23) :2521-2532
[8]   Cost-effectiveness of lumbar fusion and nonsurgical treatment for chronic low back pain in the Swedish lumbar spine study:: A multicenter, randomized, controlled trial from the Swedish Lumbar Spine Study Group [J].
Fritzell, P ;
Hägg, O ;
Jonsson, D ;
Nordwall, A .
SPINE, 2004, 29 (04) :421-434
[9]  
Fritzell P, 2001, SPINE, V26, P2533, DOI 10.1097/00007632-200112010-00004
[10]   The relationship between facet joint osteoarthritis and disc degeneration of the lumbar spine: an MRI study [J].
Fujiwara, A ;
Tamai, K ;
Yamato, M ;
An, HS ;
Yoshida, H ;
Saotome, K ;
Kurihashi, A .
EUROPEAN SPINE JOURNAL, 1999, 8 (05) :396-401