AzTrials
AzTrials

Bone LesionNCT03509480

Vitoss With Bone Marrow Aspirate Versus Prodense

A study testing Surgical Curettage for benign bone lesion in people with Bone Lesion, run by State University of New York - Upstate Medical University.

Completed

Finished. The study has ended and is not enrolling. Results may be posted on the official record.

Official record
Search all trials

Trial summary

For benign curetted tumor defects, ultraporous beta-tricalcium phosphate (TCP) synthetic graft material (Vitoss; Orthovita, Inc., now Stryker, Inc.) persists for a year or longer in some cases even when BMA is added. Read more about this study

Who is it for?
Any age
Conditions the study is for
Bone Lesion
What is being tested?
Surgical Curettage for benign bone lesion
Type of treatment
Surgery or procedure
Could I receive a placebo?
No, everyone receives an active treatment
How many people
53 participants
Where
No sites listed yet
Study dates
1 Jan 2009to 28 Feb 2018
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 Any age
  • All sexes
  • No healthy volunteers
  • Child, Adult, Older adult

Who may be able to join

  • Patients presenting with cavitary bone lesions requiring surgical curettage (removal of tumor and scraping) will be asked to participate
  • Patients must be able to read and understand the written informed consent
  • Patients must be willing and able to return to the office for follow up appointments and xrays for at least two years

Who cannot join

  • Patients with active or chronic infections
  • Patients with bone marrow disorders
  • Patients with contraindications to use of Vitoss or Prodense as listed on package inserts
  • Patients who prefer to use autologous or allogeneic graft material alone (without synthetic filler)

About this study

Official title: Prospective Randomized Clinical Trial Comparing Ultraporous Beta-TCP With BMA to Combined TCP With Calcium Sulfate in Curetted Benign Bone Lesions

For benign curetted tumor defects, ultraporous beta-tricalcium phosphate (TCP) synthetic graft material (Vitoss; Orthovita, Inc., now Stryker, Inc.) persists for a year or longer in some cases even when BMA is added. What is not known is whether the addition to TCP of calcium sulfate (CS), which by itself has a more rapid resorption profile, will lead to more rapid resorption and incorporation of the composite graft material.

Read the detailed description

Bone graft obtained from a patient's own bone (autogenous), usually around the pelvis, is currently considered the gold standard for bone grafting material. It provides a structural scaffold on which the patient's own bone may grow into (osteoconduction), growth factors that can stimulate healing (osteoinduction), and primitive cells (progenitors) that can stimulate bone formation directly (osteogenesis). It readily regains a blood supply from the surrounding tissues (revascularization) and is incorporated into the recipient site. However, there are significant disadvantages in the use of the patient's own bone graft including complications where the bone is taken from (donor site morbidity), limited availability and expense. Hence, human donor bone procured at the time of death (allografts) and synthetic bone fillers have been used as an alternative to the patient's own bone (autogenous bone graft). Both of these provide an osteoconductive scaffolding but nothing more. For defects created by scraping (curettage) of non-cancerous (benign) bone lesions, a structural scaffold (osteoconduction) is generally considered the minimal necessary role that the graft material must serve to allow healing of the defect. In many cases, this is adequate to allow healing of the defect by a process of creeping substitution, with neighboring bone growing from the periphery to the center in a centripetal fashion.

Ideally, the pace at which the graft material is resorbed is identical to the parallel pace of new bone formation. However, some materials have extremely slow replacement and are essentially never replaced fully for all practical purposes. An example of this is coralline hydroxyapatite. At the opposite end of the spectrum, some graft materials are resorbed at a far faster rate than bone formation. An example of this has been calcium sulfate. In the investigator's experience with the use of the synthetic bone graft substitute ultraporous beta-tricalcium phosphate (TCP) (Vitoss, Orthovita, Inc.) over the first 3 years of its availability, the graft material, when combined with local blood alone, performed well clinically but persisted for a year or longer radiographically in some cases. Prolonged persistence of the graft material may serve as a potential stress riser, although the investigator did not observe any untoward late effects in our published work. Subsequently, the investigator completed a randomized prospective evaluation of ultraporous beta-TCP alone and compared to beta-TCP combined with autologous bone marrow aspirate (BMA). The hypothesis was that both graft resorption and trabeculation (radiographic measures of incorporation of the synthetic material by the native bone) would be more advanced at each time point in those patients that received BMA plus TCP compared to those that received TCP alone. However, based upon the investigator's clinical impression, there does not appear to be a clinically relevant difference in the rate of bone incorporation. On the other hand, even at 1 year post-operatively, there appears by CT scan to be persistent beta-TCP in the grafted defects. Hence, it is felt that the rate of resorption and incorporation of the beta-TCP, with or without BMA does not keep pace with new bone formation.

Recently, a new osteoconductive synthetic bone graft material has become available that combines beta-TCP and calcium sulfate (PRO-DENSE® Injectable Regenerative Graft, Wright Medical Technology, Inc.). Theoretically, the calcium sulfate from this product will leach out more quickly, leaving a more porous local environment comprised of residual beta-TCP. Hence, the hypothesis of this study is that PRO-DENSE® may result in a more desirable, physiologic pace of graft incorporation when compared to beta-TCP and BMA. The overall study plan is to compare, in a randomized prospective fashion, PRO-DENSE injectable regenerative graft to ultraporous beta-TCP (VITOSS® morsels, OrthoVita, Inc.), the latter combined with bone marrow aspirate (BMA). VITOSS is the same porous material the investigator has used in an earlier study and is conducive to the addition of osteoinductive agents such as BMA, whereas PRO-DENSE is not.

A total of 56 patients with any type of benign bone lesion indicated for surgical curettage would be offered inclusion in the study, randomized to receive either PRO-DENSE or VITOSS with BMA, and followed for a minimum of 2 years post-operatively. Bone marrow aspiration would be obtained by a needle inserted through the skin (percutaneous aspiration) from the large bone of the pelvis (iliac crest) using a standard bone marrow aspiration needle. Patients with infection, bone marrow disorders, or other conditions that preclude use of supplementary the patient's bone marrow as well as those who prefer to use their own bone graft material (autograft) or donated human bone graft (allograft) alone would be excluded. Each patient will undergo radiographic evaluation of the lesion at 6 weeks, 3 months, 6 months, 1 year, 18 months and 2 years post operatively. At one time point (1 year) a computerized tomogram (CT) of the grafted region will be obtained for each patient. Two qualified, blinded, independent reviewers will evaluate the radiographs and CT scans for six criteria: 1.) presence of graft within the soft tissues, 2.) presence of a rim of radiolucency surrounding the grafted defect, 3.) size/circumference of the rim of radiolucency, 4.) resorption of graft material, 5.) trabeculation through the defect and 6.) persistence of graft material in the lesion. Kappa statistics have shown good agreement for these parameters in our published retrospective preliminary analysis of results for the TCP use without bone marrow by the investigator.

Conditions
Bone Lesion
Being tested
Surgical Curettage for benign bone lesion

What participants receive

What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.

  • Surgical Curettage for benign bone lesionProcedure or surgery

    Surgical curettage for benign bone lesion, created defects will be filled with one of two types of graft material Vitoss versus Prodense, there are no other devices or drugs used

Study groups in NCT03509480
Study groupRoleWhat they receive
Curettage with VitossActive comparatorultraporous beta-tricalcium phosphate mixed with autologous bone marrow aspirate for patients undergoing surgical curettage for benign bone lesions
Receives: Procedure: Surgical Curettage for benign bone lesion
Curettage with ProdenseActive comparatorultraporous beta-tricalcium phosphate mixed with calcium sulfate for patients undergoing surgical curettage for benign bone lesions
Receives: Procedure: Surgical Curettage for benign bone lesion

What is being measured

The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.

  1. Change in percentage of resorption of graft materials into the native bone as observed via CT scan

    Radiographic interpretation by two independent radiologists was completed to assess the change in percentage of resorption of Vitoss with BMA or Prodense into the native bone at the 6 week, 3, 6, 12, 18 and 24 months timepoints based on review of x-ryas as well as by CT Scan at 12 month post operatively.

    Measured: minimum of 24 months post operatively

Secondary outcomes (1)
  1. Presence of graft material within the soft tissue

    Radiographic interpretation by two independent radiologists was completed to assess presence of graft material within the soft tissue at the 6 week, 3, 6, 12, 18 and 24 months timepoints, based on radiograph and CT Scan review

    Measured: minimum of 24 months post operatively

Timeline

From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.

  1. First posted26 Apr 2018
  2. Study start1 Jan 2009
  3. Primary completion31 Dec 2012
  4. Study completion28 Feb 2018

Resources

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
Model description
Comparison of ultraporous beta-tricalcium phosphate (Vitoss) with autologous bone marrow aspirate vs ultraporous beta-tricalcium phosphate with calcium sulfate (Prodense)
Masking
None (open label)
Enrolment
53 participants (actual)
IDs, dates and publications
ClinicalTrials.gov ID
NCT03509480
Sponsor's protocol ID
248474
Status last verified
Apr 2018
First submitted
2 Mar 2018
Last updated
1 May 2018
Results posted
No
Data monitoring committee
No
FDA-regulated drug
No
FDA-regulated device
No
Individual data sharing
No: There is no plan to share IPD at this time

Questions about this trial

What is this clinical trial studying?

A study testing Surgical Curettage for benign bone lesion in people with Bone Lesion, run by State University of New York - Upstate Medical 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 3 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: finished, as of the sponsor's last update on 1 May 2018. 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?

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?

Change in percentage of resorption of graft materials into the native bone as observed via CT scan (time frame: minimum of 24 months post operatively). 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 1 May 2018.

Free account

Keep searching with a free account

You’ve used your 3 free searches for this session. Log in or create a free AzTrials account to keep searching clinical trials and save the ones you want to follow.

Create a free accountLog in