CClinicalTrials.gg
CompletedNCT00948532Updated Dec 24, 2025

Osteocel® Plus in eXtreme Lateral Interbody Fusion (XLIF®)

An observational study in Degenerative Disc Disease and Back Pain, sponsored by NuVasive. Completed at 13 sites in United States. Open to participants aged 18 Years to 80 Years. Per ClinicalTrials.gov, last updated 2025-12-24.

Sponsored by NuVasive · Observational

Study type
Observational
Model
Cohort
Time perspective
Prospective
Enrollment
104
Ages
18 Years to 80 Years
Sex
All
01

Study summary

This is a prospective, non-randomized multi-center study to compare the use of Osteocel® Plus in subjects who receive XLIF® (eXtreme Lateral Interbody Fusion) surgery at one or two levels. These subjects will present with degenerative conditions in the lumbar spine that are amenable to surgical treatment and will be screened prior to study enrollment. Subjects will receive Osteocel Plus during their XLIF operation. Subjects will be followed for 24-months following surgery to determine the number of study subjects that are solidly fused at or before 24 months postoperatively, and to determine the mean time to fusion. This data will be compared to published and/or retrospective data for autograft, synthetic ceramics and Bone Morphogenetic Protein (BMP).

Read the detailed description

Osteocel Plus is an allograft cellular bone matrix containing native mesenchymal stem cells (MSCs) which is intended to mimic the biologic performance of autograft without the morbidity associated with the autograft harvest. Mesenchymal stem cells, like those found in Osteocel Plus, are naturally occurring in the body and can differentiate into a variety of tissue types, depending on the local environment. Once implanted, MSCs can differentiate into osteoblasts, which produce new bone matrix. MSCs also naturally secrete bone-inducing growth factors that signal the patient's endogenous cells to migrate and participate in the bone formation process. Osteocel Plus is different from other orthobiologic products such as DBM and allograft cancellous bone because it contains living stem cells, which provide osteogenic potential. The cells include mesenchymal stem cells from an adult human donor; they are not from an embryonic source.

This study is being conducted to determine the percentage of patients with solid spinal fusions after being treated with Osteocel in an XLIF procedure. Due to the unique processing conditions, Osteocel Plus retains a high concentration of stem cells in conjunction with the allograft bone matrix, so it is hypothesized that the fusion rate with Osteocel Plus will be comparable to published data for autograft. The Osteocel product family has already been used in approximately 15,000 cases worldwide.

02

Conditions studied

  • Degenerative Disc Disease
  • Back Pain

Keywords

  • degenerative disc disease
  • lumbar spine
  • XLIF
  • Degenerative conditions
03

In context

Intervertebral Disc Degeneration

464 studies on the registry are indexed under Intervertebral Disc Degeneration; 98 are open to participants now.

This study's enrollment of 104 is below the median of 120 across 166 observational studies indexed under Intervertebral Disc Degeneration.

Browse Intervertebral Disc Degeneration studies →

Lead sponsor

NuVasive is the lead sponsor of 38 studies on the registry; 8 are open to participants now.

Counted across the registry records on this site, refreshed daily.

04

Who can participate

Ages eligible
18 Years to 80 Years
Sexes eligible
All
Accepts healthy volunteers
No
Sampling method
Non-probability sample

Study population

Existing clinic patients

Inclusion criteria

  1. Persistent back and/or leg pain unresponsive to conservative treatment for at least six (6) months, unless clinically indicated earlier
  2. Indicated for interbody fusion of one or two contiguous lumbar segments (L1 to L5)
  3. Objective evidence of primary diagnosis must be confirmed by appropriate imaging studies
  4. 18-80 years of age at the date of written informed consent
  5. Able to undergo surgery based on physical exam, medical history and surgeon judgment
  6. Expected to survive at least 2 years beyond surgery
  7. Willing and able to return for post-treatment exams according to the follow-up called for in the protocol
  8. Signed and dated Informed Consent Form

Exclusion criteria

Exclusion Criteria:

  1. Patient has a mental or physical condition that would limit the ability to comply with study requirements
  2. Lumbar spine abnormality requiring treatment at more than two levels
  3. Systemic or local infection; active or latent
  4. Previous failed fusion at the operative level
  5. Diseases that significantly inhibit bone healing (osteoporosis, metabolic bone disease, uncontrolled diabetes, dialysis dependent renal failure, symptomatic liver disease)
  6. Undergoing chemotherapy or radiation treatment, or chronic use of steroids (defined as more than 6 weeks of steroid use within 12 months of surgery, other than episodic use or inhaled corticosteroids)
  7. Pregnant, or plans to become pregnant during the study
  8. Subject is a prisoner
  9. Involvement in active litigation relating to the spine (worker's compensation claim is allowed if it is not contended)
  10. A significant general illness (e.g., HIV, active metastatic cancer of any type) is present; subject is immunocompromised or is being treated with immunosuppressive agents
  11. Participating in another clinical study that would confound study data
05

Study design

Observational model
Cohort
Time perspective
Prospective
Enrollment
104 participants (actual)
Patient registry
No

Interventions

  • Biologicalbiologic, Osteocel Plus

    Osteocel® Plus

    Also known as: Osteocel® Plus

06

What researchers measure

Primary outcomes

  1. The proportion of subjects with radiographically apparent fusion.

    Time frame: 6-months, 12-months and 24-months

Secondary outcomes

  1. The evaluation of angular displacement on flexion/extension films.

    Time frame: Post-op, 6-week, 3-month, 6-month, 12-month, 24-month

  2. The evaluation of bridging bone on CT.

    Time frame: 6-month, 12-month

  3. Preservation of interbody height over time.

    Time frame: All post-operative follow-up visits: Post-op, 6-week, 3-month, 6-month, 12-month, 24-month

  4. The rate of complications attributable to the use of Osteocel Plus requiring intervention.

    Time frame: All study follow-up visits: Post-op, 6-week, 3-month, 6-month, 12-month, 24-month

  5. The change in subject self-reported pain ratings (VAS scores).

    Time frame: from baseline through post-operation follow-up (visits at post-op, 6-week, 3-month, 6-month, 12-month and 24-months)

  6. The change in Oswestry Disability Index scores.

    Time frame: from baseline through post-operation follow-up (visits at post-op, 6-week, 3-month, 6-month, 12-month and 24-months)

07

Study locations

13 sites
  • Shiley Center for Orthopaedic, Scripps Green Hospital
    La Jolla, California 92037, United States
  • Broward Spine Institute
    Hollywood, Florida 33021, United States
  • South Florida Spine Institute, Mount Sinai Medical Center
    Miami Beach, Florida 33140, United States
  • Southeastern Spine Center, Doctors Hospital of Sarasota
    Sarasota, Florida 34232, United States
  • USF, Tampa General Hospital
    Tampa, Florida 33606, United States
  • Pinnacle Orthopaedics, Wellstone Kennestone Hospital
    Marietta, Georgia 30060, United States
  • The Spine Center of DuPage Medical Group, Edward Hospital
    Naperville, Illinois 60540, United States
  • Indiana Center for Neurosurgery
    Indianapolis, Indiana 46219, United States
  • Columbia Orthopaedic Group, Boone Hospital Center
    Columbia, Missouri 65205, United States
  • Spine Midwest, St. Mary's Health Center
    Jefferson City, Missouri 65101, United States
  • Western Regional Center for Brain & Spine Surgery, Surgery Center of S. Nevada
    Las Vegas, Nevada 89109, United States
  • Buffalo Spine Surgery, Kenmore Mercy
    Lockport, New York 14094, United States
  • Duke University Medical Center
    Chapel Hill, North Carolina 27710, United States
08

References and documents

Related links

09

Updates

Tracking since Sep 25, 2026
No changes since tracking began. The registry record was last updated on Dec 24, 2025, before this site started recording changes on Sep 25, 2026. Its history is on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗
10

Registry details

Key details

Study ID
NCT00948532
Lead sponsor
NuVasive
Responsible party
Sponsor
First posted
Jul 29, 2009
Start date
Mar 2009
Primary completion
Oct 2012
Completion
Oct 2012
Last update
Dec 24, 2025

Study contacts

Kelli Howell, MS
study director · NuVasive

Oversight

Data monitoring committee
No
View the source record on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗

Not currently enrolling

This study is completed, as verified in Dec 2025. You cannot join it, but the record below documents what was studied.

Follow this study

Get an email when the registry record changes — status, dates, results — or when someone posts here.

Sign in to follow

Discussion

Questions and observations about this study, from anyone following it. Not medical advice, and not a channel to the study team — their contact details are on the registry record.

Sign in to join the discussion. Reading takes no account; posting does. You choose a display name, and a pseudonym is the default.

Nothing here yet. If you are running this trial, taking part in it, or weighing whether to, this is the place to say so.

Start the discussion