Cervical Spine FractureNCT02880839
Digital Navigation Enhances Cervical Pedicle Screw Placement Accuracy and Safety
A study testing Partial cervical lamina excision group, Pipeline-dredge discharge group and Digital navigation group in people with Cervical Spine Fracture, run by Nantong University.
Trial summary
To compare the internal fixation results of three pedicle screw implantation methods and investigated the accuracy and safety of digital navigation-assisted pedicle screw placement. Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages 18 to 65 years
- Conditions the study is for
- Cervical Spine Fracture
- What is being tested?
- Partial cervical lamina excision group, Pipeline-dredge discharge group and Digital navigation group
- Type of treatment
- Medical device
- Could I receive a placebo?
- No, everyone receives an active treatment
- How many people
- 76 participants
- Where
- No sites listed yet
- Study dates
- Sep 2013to Dec 2017
- Phase
- Interventional
- 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 18 to 65 years
- All sexes
- No healthy volunteers
- Adult, Older adult
Who may be able to join
- Fracture of the posterior column of the cervical spine or fracture of the anterior-posterior column of the cervical spine without severe vertebral body injury
- Non-traumatic cervical lamina destabilization, including metastatic tumor and rheumatoid arthritis
- Kyphotic deformity after cervical lamina resection
- Segmental destabilization after nerve root or spinal cord decompression
- Subjected to revision after anterior cervical spine surgery
- Scheduled to undergo internal fixation by cervical pedicle screw
Show all 9Show fewer
- Age approximately 62 years
- Either sex
- Provision of signed informed consent to participate in the trial
Who cannot join
- Cervical pedicle injury resulting from trauma or tumor
- Severe osteoporosis
- Anatomical variation of the vertebral artery
- Unable or declined to proceed with internal fixation by pedicle screws
About this study
Official title: Digital Navigation Enhances Cervical Pedicle Screw Placement Accuracy and Safety: A Randomized Controlled Trial
To compare the internal fixation results of three pedicle screw implantation methods and investigated the accuracy and safety of digital navigation-assisted pedicle screw placement.
Read the detailed description
History and current status of related studies
The cervical pedicle is a tiny structure adjacent to important tissues including the spinal cord and vertebral artery. Cervical pedicle screw internal fixation is the conventional treatment for cervical spine fracture, and the technique provides acceptable internal fixation; however, current manipulation methods result in high pedicle screw penetration rates, a high risk of damage to peripheral vessels and nerves, and high rates of postoperative deformity. Improved techniques and minimally invasive methods such as transcutaneous pedicle screw implantation have been designed to effectively reduce surgery-related injury while maintaining the accuracy and safety of pedicle screw implantation. Unfortunately, there is no unified standard regarding implantation of cervical pedicle screws, and many pedicle screw implantation methods are used including partial cervical lamina excision and pipeline-dredge discharge. However, both of these techniques are clinically limited because of poor maneuverability. Digital navigation is an emerging technique based on the discrete-accumulation principle. The technique integrates computer methods, numerical control, laser and new materials, and provides a new digital technique for confirming the location and orientation of cervical pedicle screws, ensuring safe surgical operation.
Features different from other related studies
Previous studies focused primarily on investigating the curative effects of pedicle screw implantation in cervical spine fracture. To the best of the investigators knowledge, there are no studies of cervical spine fracture treatment by digital navigation-assisted cervical pedicle screw placement before June 2006 in Web of Science. The investigators located two similar articles (Cervical Spondylotic Myelopathy Surgical Trial (identifier: NCT02076113) and Slotted Hole Versus Fixed Hole C-Tek (identifier: NCT00585923)) in a search of ClinicalTrials.gov up to June 2006. The outcome measures in these two studies included bony fusion Short Form 36 and the physical component score. In contrast to these two studies regarding inclusion criteria and grouping, the investigators study was designed to investigate the accuracy and safety of digital navigation-assisted cervical pedicle screw placement, hoping to provide valuable quantitative evidence for the clinical application of this technique.
Adverse events
Possible adverse events included any expected or unexpected symptoms. If severe adverse events occurred, their details including the date of occurrence and measures taken to treat the adverse events were reported to the principal investigator and the institutional review board within 24 hours.
Data collection, management, analysis and open access
Data collection: Case report forms with demographic data, disease diagnosis, accompanying diseases, drug allergy history, and adverse events were collected, processed using Epidata software (Epidata Association, Odense, Denmark), collated, and then recorded electronically by data managers using a double-data entry strategy.
Data management: The locked electronic database was accessible and locked only by the project manager, and was not altered. Paper and electronic data regarding screening, informed consent, and clinical outcomes have been preserved at the Affiliated Hospital of Nantong University, China.
Data analysis: The electronic database was statistically analyzed by a professional statistician who created an outcome analysis report that was submitted to the lead researchers. An independent data monitoring committee supervised and managed the trial data, ensuring a scientific and stringent trial to yield accurate and complete data.
Data open access: Anonymized trial data was published at http://www.figshare.com.
Statistical analysis
Statistical analysis was performed by a statistician using SPSS 19.0 software (SPSS Inc.) and followed the intention-to-treat principle. Normally distributed measurement data was expressed as mean, standard deviation, and minimums and maximums. Non-normally distributed measurement data were expressed as lower quartile (q1), and median and upper quartile (q3). The Kruskal-Wallis H-test was used to compare the visual analogue scale spine scores among the three groups, and Fisher's exact test was used to compare the degree of bony fusion of the atlantoaxial joint and the incidence of adverse reactions. P < 0.05 was considered statistically significant.
- Conditions
- Cervical Spine Fracture
- Being tested
- Partial cervical lamina excision group, Pipeline-dredge discharge group, Digital navigation group
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
Partial cervical lamina excision groupDevice
Patients with cervical fracture were assigned to undergo partial cervical lamina excision and cervical pedicle screw internal fixation.
Pipeline-dredge discharge groupDevice
Patients with cervical fracture were assigned to undergo pipeline-dredge discharge and cervical pedicle screw internal fixation.
Digital navigation groupDevice
Also called Digital navigation system
Patients with cervical fracture were assigned to undergo digital navigation assisted cervical pedicle screw placement.
| Study group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| Partial cervical lamina excision group | Experimental | Patients in the cervical lamina partial excision group underwent partial cervical lamina excision and cervical pedicle screw internal fixation. Receives: Device: Partial cervical lamina excision group |
| Pipeline-dredge discharge group | Experimental | Patients in the pipeline-dredge discharge group underwent pipeline-dredge discharge and cervical pedicle screw internal fixation. Receives: Device: Pipeline-dredge discharge group |
| Digital navigation group | Experimental | Patients in the digital navigation group underwent digital navigation-assisted cervical pedicle placement. Receives: Device: Digital navigation group |
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
the penetration degree of the cervical pedicle screws
According to whether screws penetrated the pedicle and the degree of penetration, screw insertion was graded in three levels: grade I, pedicle screws do not penetrate the pedicular cortex; grade II, screw threads penetrate the cortex at the isthmic portion of the pedicle (no more than 1/4 length of the screw diameter); grade III, screws obviously penetrate the cortex at the isthmic portion of the pedicle (> 1/4 length of the screw diameter) with risk of peripheral nerve and vessel injury, and poor stabilization of the internal fixation.
Measured: 12 months after internal fixation
Secondary outcomes (4)
bony fusion rate of the atlantoaxial joint
To evaluate fracture healing. Bone fusion rate in the atlantoaxial joint was calculated as the percentage of patients with bony fusion of the atlantoaxial joint divided by the total patient number in each group.
Measured: 12 and 36 months after internal fixation
Visual analogue scale spine score
To evaluate cervical neck pain. The visual analogue scale spine score ranges
Measured: prior to and 12 and 36 months after internal fixation
American Spinal Injury Association Classification
To evaluate improvements in neurological function
Measured: prior to and 12 and 36 months after internal fixation
incidence of adverse events
To evaluate the safety of each pedicle screw implantation method. The incidence of adverse events was calculated as the percentage of patients developing adverse events divided by the total patient number in each group.
Measured: 12 and 36 months after internal fixation
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted26 Aug 2016 (estimated)
- Study startSep 2013
- Primary completionDec 2016 (estimated)
- Study completionDec 2017 (estimated)
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Other trials for Cervical Spine FractureStudies 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 N/A
- Primary purpose
- Treatment
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- None (open label)
- Enrolment
- 76 participants (actual)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- Nantong University
- Sponsor type
- University, hospital or other
- Responsible party
- Principal investigator, Junjie Guan, Nantong University
- Investigators
- Junjie Guan, Master, Principal investigator, Affiliated Hospital of Nantong University
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT02880839
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- NantongU_001
- Status last verified
- Aug 2016
- First submitted
- 19 Aug 2016
- Last updated
- 26 Aug 2016
- Results posted
- No
- Data monitoring committee
- Yes
- Individual data sharing
- Undecided
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 26 Aug 2016. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- Digital Navigation Enhances Cervical Pedicle Screw Placement Accuracy and Safety: A Randomized Controlled Trial
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT02880839
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- NantongU_001
- Conditions
- Cervical Spine Fracture
- Study type
- Interventional
- Recruitment status
- Unknown status
- Enrolment
- 76 participants (actual)
- Lead sponsor
- Nantong UniversityUniversity, hospital or other
- Study start
- Sep 2013
- Primary completion
- Dec 2016 (estimated)
- Study completion
- Dec 2017 (estimated)
- First posted
- 26 Aug 2016 (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.
To compare the internal fixation results of three pedicle screw implantation methods and investigated the accuracy and safety of digital navigation-assisted pedicle screw placement.
Detailed description
History and current status of related studies
The cervical pedicle is a tiny structure adjacent to important tissues including the spinal cord and vertebral artery. Cervical pedicle screw internal fixation is the conventional treatment for cervical spine fracture, and the technique provides acceptable internal fixation; however, current manipulation methods result in high pedicle screw penetration rates, a high risk of damage to peripheral vessels and nerves, and high rates of postoperative deformity. Improved techniques and minimally invasive methods such as transcutaneous pedicle screw implantation have been designed to effectively reduce surgery-related injury while maintaining the accuracy and safety of pedicle screw implantation. Unfortunately, there is no unified standard regarding implantation of cervical pedicle screws, and many pedicle screw implantation methods are used including partial cervical lamina excision and pipeline-dredge discharge. However, both of these techniques are clinically limited because of poor maneuverability. Digital navigation is an emerging technique based on the discrete-accumulation principle. The technique integrates computer methods, numerical control, laser and new materials, and provides a new digital technique for confirming the location and orientation of cervical pedicle screws, ensuring safe surgical operation.
Features different from other related studies
Previous studies focused primarily on investigating the curative effects of pedicle screw implantation in cervical spine fracture. To the best of the investigators knowledge, there are no studies of cervical spine fracture treatment by digital navigation-assisted cervical pedicle screw placement before June 2006 in Web of Science. The investigators located two similar articles (Cervical Spondylotic Myelopathy Surgical Trial (identifier: NCT02076113) and Slotted Hole Versus Fixed Hole C-Tek (identifier: NCT00585923)) in a search of ClinicalTrials.gov up to June 2006. The outcome measures in these two studies included bony fusion Short Form 36 and the physical component score. In contrast to these two studies regarding inclusion criteria and grouping, the investigators study was designed to investigate the accuracy and safety of digital navigation-assisted cervical pedicle screw placement, hoping to provide valuable quantitative evidence for the clinical application of this technique.
Adverse events
Possible adverse events included any expected or unexpected symptoms. If severe adverse events occurred, their details including the date of occurrence and measures taken to treat the adverse events were reported to the principal investigator and the institutional review board within 24 hours.
Data collection, management, analysis and open access
Data collection: Case report forms with demographic data, disease diagnosis, accompanying diseases, drug allergy history, and adverse events were collected, processed using Epidata software (Epidata Association, Odense, Denmark), collated, and then recorded electronically by data managers using a double-data entry strategy.
Data management: The locked electronic database was accessible and locked only by the project manager, and was not altered. Paper and electronic data regarding screening, informed consent, and clinical outcomes have been preserved at the Affiliated Hospital of Nantong University, China.
Data analysis: The electronic database was statistically analyzed by a professional statistician who created an outcome analysis report that was submitted to the lead researchers. An independent data monitoring committee supervised and managed the trial data, ensuring a scientific and stringent trial to yield accurate and complete data.
Data open access: Anonymized trial data was published at http://www.figshare.com.
Statistical analysis
Statistical analysis was performed by a statistician using SPSS 19.0 software (SPSS Inc.) and followed the intention-to-treat principle. Normally distributed measurement data was expressed as mean, standard deviation, and minimums and maximums. Non-normally distributed measurement data were expressed as lower quartile (q1), and median and upper quartile (q3). The Kruskal-Wallis H-test was used to compare the visual analogue scale spine scores among the three groups, and Fisher's exact test was used to compare the degree of bony fusion of the atlantoaxial joint and the incidence of adverse reactions. P < 0.05 was considered statistically significant.
Study design
- Primary purpose
- Treatment
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- None (open label)
- Number of arms
- 3
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| Partial cervical lamina excision group | Experimental | Device: Partial cervical lamina excision groupPatients in the cervical lamina partial excision group underwent partial cervical lamina excision and cervical pedicle screw internal fixation. |
| Pipeline-dredge discharge group | Experimental | Device: Pipeline-dredge discharge groupPatients in the pipeline-dredge discharge group underwent pipeline-dredge discharge and cervical pedicle screw internal fixation. |
| Digital navigation group | Experimental | Device: Digital navigation groupPatients in the digital navigation group underwent digital navigation-assisted cervical pedicle placement. |
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 18 to 65 years
- Sex
- All
- Healthy volunteers
- Not accepted
- Age groups
- Adult, Older adult
Key inclusion criteria (9 listed)
- Fracture of the posterior column of the cervical spine or fracture of the anterior-posterior column of the cervical spine without severe vertebral body injury
- Non-traumatic cervical lamina destabilization, including metastatic tumor and rheumatoid arthritis
- Kyphotic deformity after cervical lamina resection
- Segmental destabilization after nerve root or spinal cord decompression
- Subjected to revision after anterior cervical spine surgery
Key exclusion criteria (4 listed)
- Cervical pedicle injury resulting from trauma or tumor
- Severe osteoporosis
- Anatomical variation of the vertebral artery
- Unable or declined to proceed with internal fixation by pedicle screws
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 |
|---|---|---|
| Partial cervical lamina excision groupPatients with cervical fracture were assigned to undergo partial cervical lamina excision and cervical pedicle screw internal fixation. | Device | Partial cervical lamina excision group |
| Pipeline-dredge discharge groupPatients with cervical fracture were assigned to undergo pipeline-dredge discharge and cervical pedicle screw internal fixation. | Device | Pipeline-dredge discharge group |
| Digital navigation groupAlso: Digital navigation systemPatients with cervical fracture were assigned to undergo digital navigation assisted cervical pedicle screw placement. | Device | Digital navigation group |
Primary outcome
the penetration degree of the cervical pedicle screws
Time frame: 12 months after internal fixation
According to whether screws penetrated the pedicle and the degree of penetration, screw insertion was graded in three levels: grade I, pedicle screws do not penetrate the pedicular cortex; grade II, screw threads penetrate the cortex at the isthmic portion of the pedicle (no more than 1/4 length of the screw diameter); grade III, screws obviously penetrate the cortex at the isthmic portion of the pedicle (> 1/4 length of the screw diameter) with risk of peripheral nerve and vessel injury, and poor stabilization of the internal fixation.
4 secondary outcomes
bony fusion rate of the atlantoaxial joint
Time frame: 12 and 36 months after internal fixation
Visual analogue scale spine score
Time frame: prior to and 12 and 36 months after internal fixation
American Spinal Injury Association Classification
Time frame: prior to and 12 and 36 months after internal fixation
incidence of adverse events
Time frame: 12 and 36 months after internal fixation
Results and safety
Results are not available in the source record.
Research links
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govLast updated by the sponsor 26 Aug 2016.
- Individual participant dataSharing planned: Undecided
Related trials for Cervical Spine Fracture
Not yet recruiting
Lumbar Erector Spinae Plane Block Versus PENG Block for Hip Fracture Surgery
Femur Neck Fracture, Hip Fractures
Active, not recruiting
Lumbar-Sacral Plexus Block vs Fascia Iliaca Block Plus Low-Dose Spinal Anesthesia for Femoral Neck Fracture Surgery
Femoral Neck Fractures, Nerve Block
Not yet recruiting
MALMOS Technique for Selected Subaxial Cervical Spine Fractures
Cervical Spine Fractures
Not yet recruiting
Trochanteric Bursa Repair and Lateral Hip Pain After Hemiarthroplasty for Femoral Neck Fracture
Femoral Neck Fracture
Not yet recruiting
Efficacy of Oral Nutritional Supplement in Femoral Neck Fracture Patients Undergoing Hip Arthroplasty
Femoral Neck Fractures, Geriatric Hip Fracture
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.
Junjie Guan, Master principal investigator
Affiliated Hospital of Nantong University
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
A study testing Partial cervical lamina excision group, Pipeline-dredge discharge group and Digital navigation group in people with Cervical Spine Fracture, run by Nantong University.
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 9 inclusion and 4 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: status not confirmed, as of the sponsor's last update on 26 Aug 2016. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.
What are the possible benefits and risks?
They depend on the study and the treatment, and no study can promise a benefit. The study team explains the known risks during informed consent, before anyone joins; the record itself does not list them.
Are results available for this study?
Results are not available in the source record.
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?
the penetration degree of the cervical pedicle screws (time frame: 12 months after internal fixation). It is what the study was designed to measure, not a finding.
Where can I read the original study information?
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 26 Aug 2016.