A prospective, randomised multicentre study comparing cervical anterior discectomy without fusion, with fusion or with arthroplasty

ISRCTN ISRCTN41681847
DOI https://doi.org/10.1186/ISRCTN41681847
Secondary identifying numbers N/A
Submission date
19/02/2006
Registration date
11/04/2006
Last edited
01/03/2021
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

Dr Roland Donk
Scientific

Weg door Jonkerbos 100
Nijmegen
6532 SZ
Netherlands

Phone +31 (0)24 3658855
Email r.donk@cwz.nl

Study information

Study designA multicentre, randomised controlled trial
Primary study designInterventional
Secondary study designRandomised controlled trial
Study setting(s)Hospital
Study typeTreatment
Scientific titleA prospective, randomised multicentre study comparing cervical anterior discectomy without fusion, with fusion or with arthroplasty
Study acronymPROCON
Study objectivesPROCON was designed to assess the clinical outcome, development of adjacent disc disease and costs of cervical anterior discectomy without fusion, with fusion using a stand-alone cage and implantation of a Bryan’s disc prosthesis. The Bryan's disc is supposed to act better than the other two.
Ethics approval(s)The Medical Ethics Committee have fully approved the study and its design on the 25th June 2003 (ref: 103/2003).
Health condition(s) or problem(s) studiedCervical disk herniation with radiculopathy
InterventionAnterior surgery without any fusion, with fusion using a cage or arthoplasty
Intervention typeOther
Primary outcome measureClinical outcome after one year estimated by patient self reports:
1. McGill pain questionnaire-Dutch language version (MPQ-DLV)
2. Neck disability
3. 36-item short form questionnaire (SF-36)
Secondary outcome measures1. Kyphosis on plain x-rays after one and five years
2. MRI at five years to elucidate the quality of the adjacent discs
Overall study start date01/09/2004
Completion date01/09/2009

Eligibility

Participant type(s)Patient
Age groupAdult
Lower age limit18 Years
SexBoth
Target number of participants270
Key inclusion criteria1. Aged 18 to 55 years
2. Cervical monoradicular symptoms
3. Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI): herniated cervical intervertebral disc and/or osteophyte in accordance with clinical symptoms and signs
4. Involved level not fused
Key exclusion criteria1. Symptoms and/or signs of myelopathy
2. Previous cervical surgery
3. Psychiatric or mental disease
4. Involvement of liability procedure
5. Alcoholism (drinking more than five units)
6. Insufficient knowledge of the Dutch language
7. Participation in another study
8. Two or more levels involved
Date of first enrolment01/09/2004
Date of final enrolment01/09/2009

Locations

Countries of recruitment

  • Netherlands

Study participating centre

Weg door Jonkerbos 100
Nijmegen
6532 SZ
Netherlands

Sponsor information

Canisius-Wilhelmina Hopsital (CWZ) (The Netherlands)
Hospital/treatment centre

Weg door Jonkerbos 100
Nijmegen
6532 SZ
Netherlands

Email r.bartels@nch.umcn.nl
ROR logo "ROR" https://ror.org/027vts844

Funders

Funder type

Hospital/treatment centre

Canisius-Wilhelmina Hopsital (CWZ) (The Netherlands)

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?
Protocol article protocol 10/11/2006 Yes No
Results article results 29/08/2017 01/03/2021 Yes No
Results article results 01/11/2020 01/03/2021 Yes No
Results article results 01/02/2018 01/03/2021 Yes No
Results article results 01/05/2017 01/03/2021 Yes No

Editorial Notes

01/03/2021: Publication references added.
14/09/2017: internal review.