Flexible or solid stabilisation for lumbar spondylosis? A randomised controlled trial - Stage 1 - Feasibility Study

ISRCTN ISRCTN33762516
DOI https://doi.org/10.1186/ISRCTN33762516
Secondary identifying numbers 04/04
Submission date
30/09/2004
Registration date
03/11/2004
Last edited
09/11/2010
Recruitment status
No longer recruiting
Overall study status
Completed
Condition category
Musculoskeletal Diseases
Prospectively registered
Protocol
Statistical analysis plan
Results
Individual participant data

Plain English summary of protocol

Not provided at time of registration

Contact information

Prof Alan Breen
Scientific

IMRCI-AECC
13-15 Parkwood Road
Bournemouth
BH5 2DF
United Kingdom

Phone +44 (0)1202 436275
Email imrci.abreen@aecc.ac.uk

Study information

Study designRandomised controlled trial
Primary study designInterventional
Secondary study designRandomised controlled trial
Study setting(s)Not specified
Study typeTreatment
Scientific title
Study acronymFleSS
Study objectivesRationale:
There have been no clinical trials of the new flexible stabilisation, versus the old rigid stabilisation surgery for the large subgroup of chronic back patients who have lumbar spondylosis pain. Furthermore, there has previously been no assessment tool with which to explain the clinical biomechanics of any kind of stabilisation. Therefore, we wish to conduct a feasibility study for randomised controlled trial of rigid, versus flexible (DYNESYS) lumbar spine stabilisation using both patient-assessed and objective biomechanical outcomes.

Objectives
To conduct a feasibility study to inform the working methods and number of subjects needed for a single-blind randomised controlled trial to
1. Compare the effectiveness of flexible (DYNESYS) with posterolateral fusion with pedicle screws and graft (PLF) and
2. Seek explanatory and predictive models for clinical outcomes using an objective spinal motion imaging assessment (OSMIA) at instrumented and adjacent levels
Ethics approval(s)Not provided at time of registration
Health condition(s) or problem(s) studiedLumbar spondylotic back pain
InterventionDYNESYS flexible posterolateral stabilisation (Intervention) versus Posterolateral fusion (PLF) with pedicle screws and graft
Intervention typeOther
Primary outcome measureODQ = Oswestry Disability Questionnaire
Secondary outcome measures1. SF36
2. Pain Scale
3. Health Transitions scale
4. Target and adjacent segment motion characteristics
Overall study start date01/04/2005
Completion date30/03/2006

Eligibility

Participant type(s)Patient
Age groupNot Specified
SexNot Specified
Target number of participants30 Added 09/10/10: only 10 patients were recruited and the study ended ended 01/04/08.
Key inclusion criteriaSubjects: Patients with severe chronic low back pain of at least 1 year's duration attributed to either post-discectomy pain or primary disc degeneration below L3 in whom conservative treatment has been ineffective and who elect to have spine stabilisation surgery.

Inclusion Criteria:
1. Age 25-65
2. Willing to participate
3. Back pain without radiculopathy and attributable to lumbar spondylosis
4. Conservative therapy tried and failed
5. Elect lumbar stabilisation (1 or 2 level, L3 downward)
6. Suitable for DYNESYS or standard posterolateral fusion (PLF) with pedicle screws and graft using a standardised procedure
7. Oswestry >30
Key exclusion criteria1. Mental illness (except mild depression)
2. No prior conservative therapy
3. Pathology such as fracture, infection, neoplasm
4. Poor understanding of English
5. Spinal stenosis
6. Spondyolisthesis
7. >2 level procedure required
8. Radicular pain
9. Litigation or compensation pending
Date of first enrolment01/04/2005
Date of final enrolment30/03/2006

Locations

Countries of recruitment

  • England
  • United Kingdom

Study participating centre

IMRCI-AECC
Bournemouth
BH5 2DF
United Kingdom

Sponsor information

Zimmer Ltd (UK)
Industry

The Courtyard
Lancaster Place
South Marston Park
Swindon
SN3 4FP
United Kingdom

ROR logo "ROR" https://ror.org/00mke2t69

Funders

Funder type

Industry

Zimmer Ltd (UK)

No information available

Results and Publications

Intention to publish date
Individual participant data (IPD) Intention to shareNo
IPD sharing plan summaryNot provided at time of registration
Publication and dissemination planNot provided at time of registration
IPD sharing plan

Study outputs

Output type Details Date created Date added Peer reviewed? Patient-facing?
Results article results 15/10/2009 Yes No