OsteoporosisPhase 3VertosIVNCT01200277
A Trial of Vertebroplasty for Painful Acute Osteoporotic Vertebral Fractures
A Phase 3 study testing percutaneous vertebroplasty in people with Osteoporosis and Vertebral Fracture, run by Elisabeth-TweeSteden Ziekenhuis at 4 sites in Netherlands.
Trial summary
The standard care in patients with a painful osteoporotic vertebral compression fracture (VCF) is conservative therapy. Percutaneous vertebroplasty (PV), is a new minimally invasive technique for pain treatment in which bone cement is injected in the fractured vertebra. Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages 50 to 95 years
- Conditions the study is for
- Osteoporosis, Vertebral Fracture
- What is being tested?
- percutaneous vertebroplasty
- Type of treatment
- Injection or infusion, Surgery or procedure
- Could I receive a placebo?
- Yes, some participants may receive a placebo
- How many people
- 80 participants
- Where
- 4 sitesNetherlands
- Study dates
- Jan 2011to Jan 2014
- Phase
- Phase 3
- Are there results?
- None posted in the registry
Key requirements
Who can take part, as listed by the sponsor. Only the study team can confirm whether you are eligible, so take this list to your doctor.
- Ages 50 to 95 years
- All sexes
- No healthy volunteers
- Adult, Older adult
Who may be able to join
- VCF on X-ray of the spine (minimal 15% loss of height)
- level of VCF Th5 or lower
- back pain ≤ 6 weeks at time of X-ray
- ≥ 50 years of age
- bone edema on MRI of the fractured vertebral body
- focal tenderness on VCF level
- decreased bone density T-scores ≤ -1
Who cannot join
- severe cardio-pulmonary condition
- untreatable coagulopathy
- systemic or local infection of the spine (osteomyelitis, spondylodiscitis)
- suspected alternative underlying disease (malignancy)
- radicular and/or cauda compression syndrome
- contra-indication for MRI
Trial locations and contacts
4 sites in 1 country.
Netherlands4 sites
Albert Schweitzer Ziekenhuis
Dordrecht, 3300AK
Catharina Ziekenhuis
Eindhoven, 5623EJ
Medisch Spectrum Twente
Enschede, 7500KA
St. Elisabeth Ziekenhuis
Tilburg, 5022GC
About this study
Official title: A Randomised Sham Controlled Trial of Vertebroplasty for Painful Acute Osteoporotic Vertebral Fractures
The standard care in patients with a painful osteoporotic vertebral compression fracture (VCF) is conservative therapy. Percutaneous vertebroplasty (PV), is a new minimally invasive technique for pain treatment in which bone cement is injected in the fractured vertebra. Recent RCTs provide conflicting results: two sham-controlled studies show no benefit of PV while an unmasked but controlled RCT found significantly better pain relief after PV at acceptable costs.
Read the detailed description
Objectives To evaluate the efficacy of bone cement injection in PV for patients with acute painful osteoporotic compression fractures, as compared with a simulated placebo procedure without injection of bone cement. We hypothesize that patients who had undergone PV would report less pain at 1 day, 1 week and 1, 3, 6 and 12 months (the primary outcomes) than those in the sham control group.
Study design VERTOS IV is a multicenter RCT concerning the treatment of patients with a painful osteoporotic VCF. Patients are recruited on the Radiology departments of the participating hospitals and randomized to PV or a simulated procedure. Upon obtaining informed consent an independent central telephone operator completes the randomisation procedure, using a computer program. The maximum allowed unbalance (block size) is six, with a maximum sample size of 84 for each participating centre. A total of 180 patients will be enrolled, 90 in each group. This is based on the assumption of a 1.5 point difference in pain relief (VAS Score) and a 20% withdrawal rate (α=0.05 and β=0.20, 7 measurement points). The enrolment of patients will take place in four centres in The Netherlands: St. Elisabeth Ziekenhuis in Tilburg, Catharina Ziekenhuis in Eindhoven, Medisch Spectrum Twente in Enschede and Albert Schweitzer Ziekenhuis in Dordrecht. Randomization will start January 2011 with an expected completion of enrolment by January 2013. There is a one-year follow-up, with the possibility of an extended follow-up at two years.
The overall Institutional Review Board is approval is obtained at the St. Elisabeth Hospital in Tilburg. In addition, each participating centre will obtain a local Institutional Review Board Approval. This study is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov., NCT01200277.
Osteoporosis- and pain medication All patients receive osteoporosis medication, such as bisphosphonates together with supplemental calcium and vitamin D. Pain medication demanded by the patient is recorded. Analgesics are classified following the WHO classification: (1) Paracetamol (acetaminophen), (2) Tramadol, (3) Tramadol and Paracetamol, (4) Morphine. Non Steroid Anti Inflammatory Drugs (NSAID) are only prescribed if patients are intolerant for opiate-derivatives or when already used. Corrections in dose and classification of pain medication are made if necessary.
Clinical follow-up An experienced nurse-practitioner requests patients to fill out a standard questionnaire before and at 1 day, 1 week, and 1, 3, 6 and 12 months after the procedure. The questionnaire consist of the VAS score and questions about use of pain medication, pain location, and pain type. The VAS score is a pain score ranging from 0 (no pain) to 10 (worst pain ever. Other medical treatment and visits to alternative medical specialists, GP's and physical therapists are recorded and compared between groups. Secondary outcomes are back pain related disability and QOL as measured with the Roland Morris Disability (RMD) Questionnaire and the Questionnaire of the European Foundation for Osteoporosis (Qualeffo), respectively. The Qualeffo is developed specifically for patients with osteoporosis. This questionnaire consists of 41 questions about: pain, physical function, social function, general health perception, and mental function. The Qualeffo score ranges from 0 (best quality of life) to 100 (worst quality of life). This questionnaire will be completed at five measurement moments (before and at 1, 3, 6, and 12 months after the procedure). The RMD questionnaire is a disability questionnaire that measures the functional status of patients with back pain. The RMD will be completed at all measurement points. All patients visit the internist at 1,3,6 and 12 months follow-up. All patients receive a pain diary. Patients are asked to fill out the VAS score and use of analgesics is recorded on a daily basis during the first month after randomization.
Sample size considerations Assuming a 1.5 point difference in pain relief as measured by VAS score and a withdrawal rate of 20% (α=0.05 and β=0.20, 7 measurement points), a total of 180 patients will be enrolled, 90 in each group.
Statistical analysis The data will be analysed according to the intention-to-treat principle. Standard statistical techniques will be used to describe characteristics of patients in both groups. We will compare baseline characteristics in the two treatment groups and if incomparability appears, we will in secondary analysis adjust for differences. The primary outcome, significant pain relief will be compared with the analysis of variance for repeated measures. If adjustment for possible baseline incomparability is needed, analysis of covariance will be done. Since we expect the difference between the two groups will particularly become evident at 3, 6 and 12 months, the analysis will also be performed at these time points.
- Conditions
- Osteoporosis, Vertebral Fracture
- Being tested
- percutaneous vertebroplasty, sham procedure
- Keywords
- osteoporosis, vertebral fracture, vertebroplasty, percutaneous
- Medical subject headings
- Osteoporosis, Spinal Fractures
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
percutaneous vertebroplastyProcedure or surgery
Using fluoroscopic guidance, the practitioner infiltrates the skin and subcutaneous tissues overlying the pedicle of the target vertebra or vertebrae with 1% lidocaine and infiltrates the periosteum of the pedicles with 0.25% bupivacaine (marcaine. For the vertebroplasty procedure, 11-gauge or 13-gauge needles are passed into the central aspect of the target vertebra or vertebrae. Bone cement is prepared on the bench and injected under constant fluoroscopy into the vertebral body. Injection is stopped when the PMMA reaches to the posterior aspect of the vertebral body or leaks into an extraosseous space, such as the intervertebral disk or an epidural or paravertebral vein.
sham procedureProcedure or surgery
Using fluoroscopic guidance, the practitioner infiltrates the skin and subcutaneous tissues overlying the pedicle of the target vertebra or vertebrae with 1% lidocaine and infiltrates the periosteum of the pedicles with 0.25% bupivacaine (marcaine. During the sham intervention, verbal and physical cues, such as pressure on the patient's back, are given, and the methacrylate monomer is opened to simulate the odor associated with mixing of cement, but the needle is not placed and cement is not injected.
| Study group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| vertebroplasty | Experimental | Using fluoroscopic guidance, the practitioner infiltrates the skin and subcutaneous tissues overlying the pedicle of the target vertebra or vertebrae with 1% lidocaine and infiltrates the periosteum of the pedicles with 0.25% bupivacaine (marcaine). For the vertebroplasty procedure, 11-gauge or 13-gauge needles are passed into the central aspect of the target vertebra or vertebrae. Bone cement is prepared on the bench and injected under constant fluoroscopy into the vertebral body. Injection is stopped when the cement reaches to the posterior aspect of the vertebral body or leaks into an extraosseous space, such as the intervertebral disk or an epidural or paravertebral vein. Receives: Procedure: percutaneous vertebroplasty |
| sham procedure | Sham comparator | Using fluoroscopic guidance, the practitioner infiltrates the skin and subcutaneous tissues overlying the pedicle of the target vertebra or vertebrae with 1% lidocaine and infiltrates the periosteum of the pedicles with 0.25% bupivacaine (marcaine). During the sham intervention, verbal and physical cues, such as pressure on the patient's back, are given, and the bone cement is prepared to simulate the odor associated with mixing of polymethacrylate , but the needle is not placed and cement is not injected. Receives: Procedure: sham procedure |
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
pain relief
Primary outcome will be pain relief at 1 day, 1 week, and 1,3, 6 and 12 months. The questionnaire consist of the VAS score and questions about use of pain medication, pain location, and pain type. Other medical treatment and visits to alternative medical specialists, GP's and physical therapists are recorded and compared between groups. Patients are asked to fill out the VAS score and use of analgesics is recorded on a daily basis during the first month after randomization.
Measured: 12 months
Secondary outcomes (2)
back pain related disability
Back pain related disability as measured with the Roland Morris Disability (RMD) Questionnaire. The Qualeffo is developed specifically for patients with osteoporosis. This questionnaire consists of 41 questions about: pain, physical function, social function, general health perception, and mental function. The RMD questionnaire is a disability questionnaire that measures the functional status of patients with back pain.
Measured: 0, 1day, 1 week, 1,3,6,12 months
Quality of Life
QOL as measured with the Questionnaire of the European Foundation for Osteoporosis (Qualeffo). The Qualeffo is developed specifically for patients with osteoporosis. This questionnaire consists of 41 questions about: pain, physical function, social function, general health perception, and mental function. The Qualeffo score ranges from 0 (best quality of life) to 100 (worst quality of life). This questionnaire will be completed at five measurement moments (before and at 1, 3, 6, and 12 months after the procedure).
Measured: 1 week, 1,3,6,12 months
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted13 Sep 2010 (estimated)
- Study startJan 2011
- Primary completionJan 2013
- Study completionJan 2014
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Publications (3)Papers the sponsor has linked to this study.
- Other trials for OsteoporosisStudies of the same condition, open and under way.
- What the trial phases meanHow a treatment moves from first tests in people to approval.
More details
For doctors and researchers: how the study is designed, who runs it, and its registry IDs.
Study design
- Study type
- Interventional
- Phase
- Phase 3
- Primary purpose
- Treatment
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- Single blind
- Who is masked
- Participant
- Enrolment
- 80 participants (actual)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- Elisabeth-TweeSteden Ziekenhuis
- Sponsor type
- University, hospital or other
- Responsible party
- Principal investigator, Willem Jan van Rooij, Elisabeth-TweeSteden Ziekenhuis
- Investigators
- Willem Jan van Rooij, PhD, Study director, St. Elisabeth ZiekenhuisPaul N Lohle, PhD, Principal investigator, St Elisabeth ZiekenhuisJolanda De Vries, PhD, Study director, St Elisabeth Ziekenhuis
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT01200277
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- EZTilburg1
- Acronym
- VertosIV
- Status last verified
- Nov 2014
- First submitted
- 7 Sep 2010
- Last updated
- 18 Nov 2014
- Results posted
- No
- Data monitoring committee
- No
Publications
Firanescu CE, de Vries J, Lodder P, Schoemaker MC, Smeets AJ, Donga E, Juttmann JR, Klazen CAH, Elgersma OEH, Jansen FH, van der Horst I, Blonk M, Venmans A, Lohle PNM. Percutaneous Vertebroplasty is no Risk Factor for New Vertebral Fractures and Protects Against Further Height Loss (VERTOS IV). Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol. 2019 Jul;42(7):991-1000. doi: 10.1007/s00270-019-02205-w. Epub 2019 Apr 2.
PubMed 30941490Firanescu CE, de Vries J, Lodder P, Venmans A, Schoemaker MC, Smeets AJ, Donga E, Juttmann JR, Klazen CAH, Elgersma OEH, Jansen FH, Tielbeek AV, Boukrab I, Schonenberg K, van Rooij WJJ, Hirsch JA, Lohle PNM. Vertebroplasty versus sham procedure for painful acute osteoporotic vertebral compression fractures (VERTOS IV): randomised sham controlled clinical trial. BMJ. 2018 May 9;361:k1551. doi: 10.1136/bmj.k1551.
PubMed 29743284Firanescu C, Lohle PN, de Vries J, Klazen CA, Juttmann JR, Clark W, van Rooij WJ; VERTOS IV study group. A randomised sham controlled trial of vertebroplasty for painful acute osteoporotic vertebral fractures (VERTOS IV). Trials. 2011 Apr 5;12:93. doi: 10.1186/1745-6215-12-93.
PubMed 21466679
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 18 Nov 2014. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- A Randomised Sham Controlled Trial of Vertebroplasty for Painful Acute Osteoporotic Vertebral Fractures
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT01200277
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- VertosIV / EZTilburg1
- Conditions
- Osteoporosis, Vertebral Fracture
- Keywords
- osteoporosis, vertebral fracture, vertebroplasty, percutaneous
- Phase
- Phase 3
- Study type
- Interventional
- Recruitment status
- Completed
- Enrolment
- 80 participants (actual)
- Lead sponsor
- Elisabeth-TweeSteden ZiekenhuisUniversity, hospital or other
- Study start
- Jan 2011
- Primary completion
- Jan 2013 (actual)
- Study completion
- Jan 2014 (actual)
- First posted
- 13 Sep 2010 (estimated)
- Results
- Not posted in the source record
Clinical summary
The research question as the sponsor registered it. This describes what the study plans to test, not what it found.
The standard care in patients with a painful osteoporotic vertebral compression fracture (VCF) is conservative therapy. Percutaneous vertebroplasty (PV), is a new minimally invasive technique for pain treatment in which bone cement is injected in the fractured vertebra. Recent RCTs provide conflicting results: two sham-controlled studies show no benefit of PV while an unmasked but controlled RCT found significantly better pain relief after PV at acceptable costs.
Detailed description
Objectives To evaluate the efficacy of bone cement injection in PV for patients with acute painful osteoporotic compression fractures, as compared with a simulated placebo procedure without injection of bone cement. We hypothesize that patients who had undergone PV would report less pain at 1 day, 1 week and 1, 3, 6 and 12 months (the primary outcomes) than those in the sham control group.
Study design VERTOS IV is a multicenter RCT concerning the treatment of patients with a painful osteoporotic VCF. Patients are recruited on the Radiology departments of the participating hospitals and randomized to PV or a simulated procedure. Upon obtaining informed consent an independent central telephone operator completes the randomisation procedure, using a computer program. The maximum allowed unbalance (block size) is six, with a maximum sample size of 84 for each participating centre. A total of 180 patients will be enrolled, 90 in each group. This is based on the assumption of a 1.5 point difference in pain relief (VAS Score) and a 20% withdrawal rate (α=0.05 and β=0.20, 7 measurement points). The enrolment of patients will take place in four centres in The Netherlands: St. Elisabeth Ziekenhuis in Tilburg, Catharina Ziekenhuis in Eindhoven, Medisch Spectrum Twente in Enschede and Albert Schweitzer Ziekenhuis in Dordrecht. Randomization will start January 2011 with an expected completion of enrolment by January 2013. There is a one-year follow-up, with the possibility of an extended follow-up at two years.
The overall Institutional Review Board is approval is obtained at the St. Elisabeth Hospital in Tilburg. In addition, each participating centre will obtain a local Institutional Review Board Approval. This study is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov., NCT01200277.
Osteoporosis- and pain medication All patients receive osteoporosis medication, such as bisphosphonates together with supplemental calcium and vitamin D. Pain medication demanded by the patient is recorded. Analgesics are classified following the WHO classification: (1) Paracetamol (acetaminophen), (2) Tramadol, (3) Tramadol and Paracetamol, (4) Morphine. Non Steroid Anti Inflammatory Drugs (NSAID) are only prescribed if patients are intolerant for opiate-derivatives or when already used. Corrections in dose and classification of pain medication are made if necessary.
Clinical follow-up An experienced nurse-practitioner requests patients to fill out a standard questionnaire before and at 1 day, 1 week, and 1, 3, 6 and 12 months after the procedure. The questionnaire consist of the VAS score and questions about use of pain medication, pain location, and pain type. The VAS score is a pain score ranging from 0 (no pain) to 10 (worst pain ever. Other medical treatment and visits to alternative medical specialists, GP's and physical therapists are recorded and compared between groups. Secondary outcomes are back pain related disability and QOL as measured with the Roland Morris Disability (RMD) Questionnaire and the Questionnaire of the European Foundation for Osteoporosis (Qualeffo), respectively. The Qualeffo is developed specifically for patients with osteoporosis. This questionnaire consists of 41 questions about: pain, physical function, social function, general health perception, and mental function. The Qualeffo score ranges from 0 (best quality of life) to 100 (worst quality of life). This questionnaire will be completed at five measurement moments (before and at 1, 3, 6, and 12 months after the procedure). The RMD questionnaire is a disability questionnaire that measures the functional status of patients with back pain. The RMD will be completed at all measurement points. All patients visit the internist at 1,3,6 and 12 months follow-up. All patients receive a pain diary. Patients are asked to fill out the VAS score and use of analgesics is recorded on a daily basis during the first month after randomization.
Sample size considerations Assuming a 1.5 point difference in pain relief as measured by VAS score and a withdrawal rate of 20% (α=0.05 and β=0.20, 7 measurement points), a total of 180 patients will be enrolled, 90 in each group.
Statistical analysis The data will be analysed according to the intention-to-treat principle. Standard statistical techniques will be used to describe characteristics of patients in both groups. We will compare baseline characteristics in the two treatment groups and if incomparability appears, we will in secondary analysis adjust for differences. The primary outcome, significant pain relief will be compared with the analysis of variance for repeated measures. If adjustment for possible baseline incomparability is needed, analysis of covariance will be done. Since we expect the difference between the two groups will particularly become evident at 3, 6 and 12 months, the analysis will also be performed at these time points.
Study design
- Primary purpose
- Treatment
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- Single blind (participant)
- Number of arms
- 2
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| vertebroplasty | Experimental | Procedure: percutaneous vertebroplastyUsing fluoroscopic guidance, the practitioner infiltrates the skin and subcutaneous tissues overlying the pedicle of the target vertebra or vertebrae with 1% lidocaine and infiltrates the periosteum of the pedicles with 0.25% bupivacaine (marcaine). For the vertebroplasty procedure, 11-gauge or 13-gauge needles are passed into the central aspect of the target vertebra or vertebrae. Bone cement is prepared on the bench and injected under constant fluoroscopy into the vertebral body. Injection is stopped when the cement reaches to the posterior aspect of the vertebral body or leaks into an extraosseous space, such as the intervertebral disk or an epidural or paravertebral vein. |
| sham procedure | Sham comparator | Procedure: sham procedureUsing fluoroscopic guidance, the practitioner infiltrates the skin and subcutaneous tissues overlying the pedicle of the target vertebra or vertebrae with 1% lidocaine and infiltrates the periosteum of the pedicles with 0.25% bupivacaine (marcaine). During the sham intervention, verbal and physical cues, such as pressure on the patient's back, are given, and the bone cement is prepared to simulate the odor associated with mixing of polymethacrylate , but the needle is not placed and cement is not injected. |
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 50 to 95 years
- Sex
- All
- Healthy volunteers
- Not accepted
- Age groups
- Adult, Older adult
Key inclusion criteria (7 listed)
- VCF on X-ray of the spine (minimal 15% loss of height)
- level of VCF Th5 or lower
- back pain ≤ 6 weeks at time of X-ray
- ≥ 50 years of age
- bone edema on MRI of the fractured vertebral body
Key exclusion criteria (6 listed)
- severe cardio-pulmonary condition
- untreatable coagulopathy
- systemic or local infection of the spine (osteomyelitis, spondylodiscitis)
- suspected alternative underlying disease (malignancy)
- radicular and/or cauda compression syndrome
Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening; this overview does not establish that a patient qualifies. Full inclusion and exclusion criteria.
Interventions
| Intervention | Type | Arms |
|---|---|---|
| percutaneous vertebroplastyUsing fluoroscopic guidance, the practitioner infiltrates the skin and subcutaneous tissues overlying the pedicle of the target vertebra or vertebrae with 1% lidocaine and infiltrates the periosteum of the pedicles with 0.25% bupivacaine (marcaine. For the vertebroplasty procedure, 11-gauge or 13-gauge needles are passed into the central aspect of the target vertebra or vertebrae. Bone cement is prepared on the bench and injected under constant fluoroscopy into the vertebral body. Injection is stopped when the PMMA reaches to the posterior aspect of the vertebral body or leaks into an extraosseous space, such as the intervertebral disk or an epidural or paravertebral vein. | Procedure or surgery | vertebroplasty |
| sham procedureUsing fluoroscopic guidance, the practitioner infiltrates the skin and subcutaneous tissues overlying the pedicle of the target vertebra or vertebrae with 1% lidocaine and infiltrates the periosteum of the pedicles with 0.25% bupivacaine (marcaine. During the sham intervention, verbal and physical cues, such as pressure on the patient's back, are given, and the methacrylate monomer is opened to simulate the odor associated with mixing of cement, but the needle is not placed and cement is not injected. | Procedure or surgery | sham procedure |
Primary outcome
pain relief
Time frame: 12 months
Primary outcome will be pain relief at 1 day, 1 week, and 1,3, 6 and 12 months. The questionnaire consist of the VAS score and questions about use of pain medication, pain location, and pain type. Other medical treatment and visits to alternative medical specialists, GP's and physical therapists are recorded and compared between groups. Patients are asked to fill out the VAS score and use of analgesics is recorded on a daily basis during the first month after randomization.
2 secondary outcomes
back pain related disability
Time frame: 0, 1day, 1 week, 1,3,6,12 months
Quality of Life
Time frame: 1 week, 1,3,6,12 months
Results and safety
The study is completed, but results are not available in the source record. That does not mean the treatment did or did not work.
Research links
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govLast updated by the sponsor 18 Nov 2014.
- Derived from this study: PubMed 30941490Firanescu CE, de Vries J, Lodder P, Schoemaker MC, Smeets AJ, Donga E, Juttmann JR, Klazen CAH, Elgersma OEH, Jansen FH, van der Horst I, Blonk M, Venmans A, Lohle PNM. Percutaneous Vertebroplasty is no Risk Factor for New Vertebral Fractures and Protects Against Further Height Loss (VERTOS IV). Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol. 2019 Jul;42(7):991-1000. doi: 10.1007/s00270-019-02205-w. Epub 2019 Apr 2.
- Derived from this study: PubMed 29743284Firanescu CE, de Vries J, Lodder P, Venmans A, Schoemaker MC, Smeets AJ, Donga E, Juttmann JR, Klazen CAH, Elgersma OEH, Jansen FH, Tielbeek AV, Boukrab I, Schonenberg K, van Rooij WJJ, Hirsch JA, Lohle PNM. Vertebroplasty versus sham procedure for painful acute osteoporotic vertebral compression fractures (VERTOS IV): randomised sham controlled clinical trial. BMJ. 2018 May 9;361:k1551. doi: 10.1136/bmj.k1551.
- Derived from this study: PubMed 21466679Firanescu C, Lohle PN, de Vries J, Klazen CA, Juttmann JR, Clark W, van Rooij WJ; VERTOS IV study group. A randomised sham controlled trial of vertebroplasty for painful acute osteoporotic vertebral fractures (VERTOS IV). Trials. 2011 Apr 5;12:93. doi: 10.1186/1745-6215-12-93.
Related trials for Osteoporosis
RecruitingObservational study
A Clinical Study to Collect Real-wordt Data on Safety and Clinical Performance of the VCFix Spinal System for Treatment of Vertebral Compression Fractures of (Suspected) Osteoporotic Origin.
Vertebra Compression Fracture
Active, not recruitingObservational study
The Impact of Osteosarcopenia on Falls, Kinesiophobia, and Quality of Life in Postmenopausal Women
Osteosarcopenia, Sarcopenia
Active, not recruitingPhase 2
TCM Formula vs. HMB in Pre-Frail Elders: Muscle Strength and Bone Status
Pre-Frailty, Sarcopenia
Not yet recruitingPhase 4
Romosozumab and Denosumab Combination Therapy for Osteoporosis
Postmenopausal Osteoporosis
RecruitingObservational study
Assessment and Comparison of Osteoporosis Risk Factors After Stroke
Stroke, Osteoporosis
Referral and contact
AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals. Contact the study team or a site listed below; they decide who can take part. This study is not recruiting at the moment.
Willem Jan van Rooij, PhD study director
St. Elisabeth Ziekenhuis
Paul N Lohle, PhD principal investigator
St Elisabeth Ziekenhuis
Jolanda De Vries, PhD study director
St Elisabeth Ziekenhuis
4 sites in 1 country: see every site and its status.
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
A Phase 3 study testing percutaneous vertebroplasty in people with Osteoporosis and Vertebral Fracture, run by Elisabeth-TweeSteden Ziekenhuis at 4 sites in Netherlands.
The full registered description is in the About this study section and the official record.
Who may be eligible to take part?
The sponsor lists 7 inclusion and 6 exclusion criteria. Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening, so read the full criteria and contact a listed site.
Is this clinical trial currently recruiting?
The record says: finished, as of the sponsor's last update on 18 Nov 2014. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.
Where is the study taking place?
The record lists 4 sites in Netherlands. Whether a site is taking part right now should be confirmed with that site. See every site.
What are the possible benefits and risks?
They depend on the study and the treatment, and no study can promise a benefit. Some participants in this study may receive a placebo. The study team explains the known risks during informed consent, before anyone joins; the record itself does not list them.
What does this phase mean?
Phase 3 studies compare the treatment with the current standard treatment or a placebo in a large group, to confirm how well it works and watch for side effects.
Not every study follows the same path, and some studies (observational studies, device studies) have no phase.
Are results available for this study?
The study is completed, but results are not available in the source record. That does not mean the treatment did or did not work.
How can a doctor refer a patient or contact the research team?
The record lists no contact. The official record names the sponsor, who can be asked directly. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.
What does the primary outcome measure?
pain relief (time frame: 12 months). It is what the study was designed to measure, not a finding.
Where can I read the original study information?
On the ClinicalTrials.gov record for NCT01200277, which also lists 3 linked publications.
Does a listing mean the treatment is approved or proven to work?
No. A listing means the study is registered. It does not show that the treatment is safe, works, or is approved by a regulator.
How often is this information updated?
AzTrials copies changed records from ClinicalTrials.gov every night and reloads the whole registry every week. The sponsor last updated this record on 18 Nov 2014.