CClinicalTrials.gg
Status unknownNCT03480893SizeUpdated Jul 27, 2022

Cost-effectiveness of Small Size Interarcuair Decompression Versus Extended Decompression in Patients With Intermittent Neurogenic Claudication

An interventional study of small size interarcuair decompression and Laminectomy in Stenoses, Spinal, sponsored by Erasmus Medical Center. Status unknown at 1 site in Netherlands. Open to participants aged 40 Years and older. Per ClinicalTrials.gov, last updated 2022-07-27.

Sponsored by Erasmus Medical Center · Not applicable, Interventional, and Treatment

The sponsor has not verified this record recently (last verified Jul 2022), so the status shown — last known as Recruiting — may be out of date.
Phase
Not applicable
Study type
Interventional
Enrollment
174
Allocation
Randomized
Ages
40 Years and older
Sex
All
01

Study summary

Rationale: Minimally invasive techniques have gained popularity to decompress lumbar spinal stenosis in the elderly. However, high quality evidence based on randomised controlled trials are not available.

Objective: To investigate whether small size interarcuair decompression is more effective than conventional laminectomy in patients with intermittent neurogenic claudication caused by lumbar spinal stenosis. Study design: Double-blinded multi-centre randomised controlled trial Study population: In total 236 patients are to be included. The inclusion criteria are: subjects > 40 years of age with at least 12 weeks of complaints of intermittent neurogenic claudication based on MRI confirmed of LSS, with sufficient knowledge of the Dutch language.

Intervention: Small size interarcuair decompression versus conventional laminectomy.

Main study parameters/endpoints: Primary outcome is the Modified Roland Morris Questionnaire. Secondary outcomes are leg pain, back pain and a 6 minute walk test amongst others.

Nature and extent of the burden and risks associated with participation: based on available literature , it is believed that the risks associated with small size interarcuair decompression are no greater than that associated with a laminectomy, although these will be examined.

Read the detailed description

Intermittent neurogenic claudication (INC) caused by a lumbar spinal canal stenosis (LSS) is the most frequent reason for spinal surgery in the elderly. Multiple, less invasive surgical techniques are applied without sufficient evidence for benefits for patients or society.

The classic symptoms of INC are leg pain, which can be exacerbated with prolonged walking and standing and/or lumbar extension, and is associated with back pain. Severe stenosis is common in the elderly spine with 30.4% of the population having severe stenosis. However, only 17.5% have complaints of INC.

Conservative treatment, such as physical therapy or pain medication, may give some relief of symptoms. However, surgical treatment is considered to be the gold standard for patients with INC caused by LSS. The first technique ever described to widen the lumbar spinal canal is the wide bony decompression (laminectomy), which is still a widely used technique. However, since INC is often accompanied by back pain, and this to post-operative back pain, it is hypothesized that a wide decompression is a ground for potential instability. Hence, less invasive techniques, such as interarcuair decompression, were developed and implemented.

Recent studies claim that a limited bony decompression is the new 'golden standard' therapy for patients with INC. Limited bony decompression is believed to give less muscle damage and thus a faster postoperative recovery. Furthermore, wide bony decompression (such as a laminectomy) is believed to result in lumbar instability and iatrogenic scoliosis. Performing a procedure with potential more complications in a - generally - elderly population could at least be described as doubtful. The assumption is often made that after a wide decompression recurrence of the complaints must be scarce. However, a (cost-) effectiveness study, which evaluates the effectiveness of small bony decompression compared to a 'classical' extensive bony decompression, has not been performed yet. The opinions on this matter are diverse. A laminectomy involves the removal of more bone and structures at the back of the spine which may result in longer hospitalization and loss of productivity, but it could also lead to spinal instability on the long term. However, the risk of an insufficient decompression may be higher, potentially leading to more reoperations.

By the means of this double-blinded, multi-center randomized controlled trial the investigators will determine the (cost-) effectiveness of a limited bony decompression compared to a wide bony decompression in patients with INC.

02

Conditions studied

  • Stenoses, Spinal

Browse trials for

Keywords

  • laminectomy
  • laminotomy
  • lumbar canal stenosis
03

Who can participate

Ages eligible
40 Years and older
Sexes eligible
All
Accepts healthy volunteers
No

Inclusion criteria

  • At least 12 weeks of complaints of INC
  • Magnetic resonance imaging showing LSS
  • Age >40 years of age
  • Sufficient knowledge of the Dutch language
  • Signed informed consent

Exclusion criteria

Exclusion Criteria:

  • History of lumbar spine surgery
  • >2 lumbar levels operation or needed discectomy
  • Degenerative spondylolisthesis > grade 1 (on a scale of 1 to 4), scoliosis or disc herniation
  • ASA-classification >3
  • Serious psychopathology
  • Pregnancy
  • Active malignancy
  • Plans to move abroad during study period
04

Study design

Phase
Not applicable
Primary purpose
Treatment
Allocation
Randomized
Intervention model
Parallel assignment
Masking
Triple (Participant, Investigator, Outcomes assessor)
Enrollment
174 participants (estimated)

Study arms

  • Experimental
    Small size interarcuair decompression

    Patients will undergo small size interarcuair decompression

    Procedure: small size interarcuair decompression

  • Active comparator
    Laminectomy

    Patients will undergo laminectomy

    Procedure: Laminectomy

Interventions

  • Proceduresmall size interarcuair decompression

    A median lumbar incision is made and the paravertebral muscles are dissected subperiosteally and retracted unilaterally or bilaterally. Decompression will be applied via decompression of the ligamentum flavum. The lateral recess will be opened bilaterally and a medial facetectomy will be performed in order maintain stability of the segments. Posterior ligaments will be spared. The wound will be closed in layers with or without a suction drain. Patients will be operated with a loupe magnification or microscope depending on the surgeon's preference.

  • ProcedureLaminectomy

    A median lumbar incision is made over the spinous processes, the laminae of the affected level(s) are exposed subperiosteally, and the supraspinous ligament will be incised. The spinous process is removed. The supra and interspinous ligament of the affected level is removed by drill or Kerrison punches. The lamen is removed of the affect level, leaving the facet joint intact. The lateral recess will be opened bilaterally and medial facetectomy will be performed in order to maintain stability of the segments. When a single level stenosis is present (e.g. L4-L5) both laminae L4 and L5 will be removed. The wound will be closed in layers with or without a suction drain. Patients will be operated with loupe magnification or microscope depending surgeon's preference.

05

What researchers measure

Primary outcomes

  1. Change on the Modified Roland-Morris Disability Questionnaire

    This is a 24-point Dutch questionnaire that is designed to assess the physical disability in patients, due to lower back pain.

    Time frame: baseline, 3 weeks, 6 weeks, 12 weeks, 6 months, 12 months, 18 months, 24 months, 36 months and 48 months after surgery

Secondary outcomes

  1. Change on the Numeric Rating Scale for leg pain

    The pain intensity in both legs (affected and non-affected) will be rated on a 11-point scale.

    Time frame: baseline, 3 weeks, 6 weeks, 12 weeks, 6 months, 12 months, 18 months, 24 months, 36 months and 48 months after surgery

  2. Change on the Numeric Rating Scale for back pain

    The pain intensity in the back will be rated on a 11-point scale.

    Time frame: baseline, 3 weeks, 6 weeks, 12 weeks, 6 months, 12 months, 18 months, 24 months, 36 months and 48 months after surgery

  3. Changes on the timed-up and go test

    This time will be measured in seconds

    Time frame: baseline, 6 months, 12 months, 24 months and 48 months after surgery

  4. Changes on the 6-minute walk test

    The endurance and distance will be measured.

    Time frame: baseline, 6 months, 12 months, 24 months and 48 months after surgery

  5. Changes on Neurological examination

    Motor changes of lower muscles will be measured.

    Time frame: baseline, 6 months, 12 months, 24 months and 48 months after surgery

  6. Changes on the Timed Chair-Stand-Test (TCST)

    The time between standing and sitting on a chair will be measured.

    Time frame: baseline, 6 months, 12 months, 24 months and 48 months after surgery

  7. Changes on the Oswestry Disability Index

    The ODI is one of the principal condition-specific outcome measures used in the management of spinal disorders.

    Time frame: baseline, 3 weeks, 6 weeks, 12 weeks, 6 months, 12 months, 18 months, 24 months, 36 months and 48 months after surgery

  8. Changes on Functional lumbar x-rays

    A functional X-ray will be obtained from all patients X-ray will be made from AP and lateral position to assess spondylolisthesis. Degenerative spondylilolisthesis is defined as a vertebral slip of at least 3 mm.

    Time frame: baseline, 6 weeks

  9. Perceived recovery

    o measure the perceived recovery a seven-point Likert scale will be used. The score on this scale vary from 'completely recovered' to 'worse than ever'.

    Time frame: 3 weeks, 6 weeks, 12 weeks, 6 months, 12 months, 18 months, 24 months, 36 months and 48 months after surgery

  10. Patient satisfaction

    To measure patient satisfaction a seven-point Likert scale will be used. The score on this scale vary from 'completely satisfied with current symptoms' to 'completely dissatisfied with current symptoms'.

    Time frame: 3 weeks, 6 weeks, 12 weeks, 6 months, 12 months, 18 months, 24 months, 36 months and 48 months after surgery

  11. Changes on the SF-36

    The SF-36 will be used as a generic quality-of-life questionnaire. The SF-36 questionnaire has been validated and found reliable for low back pain.

    Time frame: Baseline, 3 weeks, 6 weeks, 12 weeks, 6 months, 12 months, 18 months, 24 months, 36 months and 48 months after surgery

  12. Complications

    A systematic assessment of complications (including wound infection, deep venous thrombosis, urine tract infection, hematoma, and progressive neurological deficit) will be recorded out by the surgeon and research nurse, and these data are to be extracted from the patient chart. Moreover, surgeons will be asked for perioperative complications

    Time frame: 3 weeks, 6 weeks, 12 weeks, 6 months, 12 months, 18 months, 24 months, 36 months and 48 months after surgery

  13. Changes on the EuroQoL (EQ-5D)

    The EuroQoL (EQ-5D) will be used for the cost utility analysis. The tool measures five dimensions: mobility, self-care, daily activities, pain/discomfort, and anxiety/depression. Each dimension consists of one item, while five levels are distinguished (no, slight, moderate, severe problems, unable to do)

    Time frame: Baseline, 3 weeks, 6 weeks, 12 weeks, 6 months, 12 months, 18 months, 24 months, 36 months and 48 months after surgery

  14. Costs of treatment measured using cost questionnaires filled out by the patients

    Cost questionnaires will be completed at the prescribed measurements. Hospitalisation for surgery will be registered using the case record forms. Other health care utilization (including physiotherapy, visits to GP and specialists, nursing care and medication), patient costs, and absenteeism from work will be measured using cost questionnaires filled out by the patients.

    Time frame: Baseline, 3 weeks, 6 weeks, 12 weeks, 6 months, 12 months, 18 months, 24 months, 36 months and 48 months after surgery

06

Study locations

1 of 1 sites recruiting
  • Erasmus MC
    Rotterdam, Zuid-Holland 3015 CE, Netherlands
    • Pravesh Gadjradj · Contact · p.gadjradj@erasmusmc.nl
    • Biswadjiet Harhangi · Contact
    • Jamie Arjun Sharma · Principal investigator
    Recruiting
07

References and documents

Publications

  • Arjun Sharma J, Gadjradj PS, Peul WC, van Tulder MW, Moojen WA, Harhangi BS; SIZE-study group. SIZE study: study protocol of a multicentre, randomised controlled trial to compare the effectiveness of an interarcuair decompression versus extended decompression in patients with intermittent neurogenic claudication caused by lumbar spinal stenosis. BMJ Open. 2020 Oct 6;10(10):e036818. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2020-036818. PubMed 33028548 ↗

Individual participant data

Plan to share: Yes — After final publication of manuscript the data set will be available from the authors or journal of publication. Anonymized clinical data will be available.

Supporting information: Study protocol, Sap, Analytic code

08

Registry details

Key details

Study ID
NCT03480893
Lead sponsor
Erasmus Medical Center
Collaborators
Park MC, Maasstad Hospital
Responsible party
Pravesh S. Gadjradj (PhD-candidate, Erasmus Medical Center) — Principal investigator
First posted
Mar 29, 2018
Start date
Mar 1, 2020
Primary completion
Apr 1, 2023 (estimated)
Completion
Apr 1, 2024 (estimated)
Last update
Jul 27, 2022

Study contacts

Pravesh Gadjradj
Contact
p.gadjradj@erasmusmc.nl
003125689813
Biswadjiet Harhangi
principal investigator · Erasmus Medical Center

Oversight

Data monitoring committee
No
FDA-regulated drug
No
FDA-regulated device
No
View the source record on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗

Not currently enrolling

This study is status unknown, as verified in Jul 2022. 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