Spine DiseaseNCT03848377
EMG and SSEP Device (EPAD® 2.0) for Intraoperative Monitoring of Patient Undergoing Spinal Nerve Spine Surgery
An observational study of Spine Disease and Neurological Disorder, run by London Health Sciences Centre Research Institute OR Lawson Research Institute of St. Joseph's.
Trial summary
In patients undergoing spine surgery, spinal nerve roots and spinal cord are vulnerable to surgical insults especially for instrumentation and may lead to long term sequelae. The incidence of clinical peripheral neuropathy after cervical spine surgery has been reported up to 30%. Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages 18 years and older
- Conditions the study is for
- Spine Disease, Neurological Disorder
- How many people
- 30 participants
- Where
- No sites listed yet
- Study dates
- Jul 2019to Jun 2021
- Phase
- Observational
- 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 years and older
- All sexes
- No healthy volunteers
- Adult, Older adult
Study population: Study Participants: 30 patients who are scheduled to have spine surgery in LHSC.
Who may be able to join
- Adult patient (age>18 years old)
- Scheduled to have either cervical or lumbosacral spine surgery. We include all patients who will undergo either single or multiple instrumented or non-instrumented decompression/fusion with either allograft or autograft bone with a preoperative diagnosis of cervical stenosis, radiculopathy, herniated nucleus pulposus, junctional stenosis, or non-union from prior surgery.
Who cannot join
- Age <18 years old
- BMI>40
- Unable to perform preoperative neurological examination such as the language barrier
- Fluctuating neurological signs/symptoms (eg. recent CVA, peripheral neuropathy, etc)
- Unable to obtain informed consent
- Contraindication to EP monitoring - skin burns or trauma at EP electrode sites
Trial locations and contacts
No sites are listed yet.
About this study
Official title: A Feasibility Study of a Novel Combined Automated EMG and SSEP Device (EPAD® 2.0) for Intraoperative Monitoring of Spinal Nerve Roots and Spinal Cord Function During Spine Surgery
In patients undergoing spine surgery, spinal nerve roots and spinal cord are vulnerable to surgical insults especially for instrumentation and may lead to long term sequelae. The incidence of clinical peripheral neuropathy after cervical spine surgery has been reported up to 30%. Intraoperatively, spinal cord and nerves function can be monitored using electromyography (EMG) and somatosensory evoked potentials (SSEP) and thereby, intervention can be made to potentially reduce the incidence of adverse neurological sequelae. However, conventional EMG and SSEP monitoring requires presence of a trained EP technician, use of needle electrodes and currently bulky EP equipment and is thus not practical for routine clinical usage. In this study, the invesitgators will assess the clinical feasibility of using a novel miniaturized and automated EMG/SSEP device (EPAD® 2.0) in spine surgical patients.
Read the detailed description
Purpose of Research: This study is a pilot study designed to assess the ability of a novel automated EMG/SSEP device (EPAD® 2.0) to detect intraoperative spinal nerve roots injury in patients undergoing spine procedures. The specific aims are:
- to assess the clinical utility of using the EPAD® 2.0 automated device and its algorithm in monitoring spine surgery patients.
- to identify any practical limitation of using EPAD® 2.0 automated device in spine surgery patients.
Hypothesis: the novel automated EPAD® 2.0 EMG/SSEP device is easy to use and apply in spine surgery patients
BACKGROUND Surgical injuries to the spinal nerve roots or spinal cords are not infrequent in spine surgery and the consequence can be devastating. Injured patients might present with radiculopathy, motor weakness, spinal cord compression, and postoperative neuropathic pain. In cervical spine surgery, cervical nerve roots injuries especially fifth cervical (C5) nerve root are not uncommon complications, potentially resulting in upper extremity paralysis. The incidence of C5 nerve root injury ranged to as high as 30%. The other spinal nerve roots (C6-8) can suffer from the same surgical injuries during the procedure but with much lower reported incidence than C5. Spinal nerve injuries typically occur during decompression for cervical myelopathy in both anterior and posterior approaches. In lumbosacral spine surgery, a recent review of the neurological injury found a pooled incidence of 5.7% (56 of 2783 patients; range: 0.46-24%), in which pedicle malposition accounted for one-fifth of the injuries.
A multimodality monitoring such as SSEP and EMG can be used in spine surgery to allow comprehensive monitoring of the spinal cord and nerve roots function and an attempt to reduce the risks of surgical injuries. Although the idea of closely monitoring of spinal cord and nerve roots function during high-risk cervical spine instrumentation procedure is appealing, the utilization of intraoperative neurophysiological monitoring is limited. One reason is the current requirements for a trained technician and for electrode placement and observation of monitoring SSSEP signals, the requirement for the use of needle electrodes for SSEP monitoring and specific training for a neurophysiologist in the interpretation of SSEP signals.
In attempt to resolve this problem, the investigators has been involved in developing an automated SSEP device (EPAD®, SafeOp Surgical, Hunt Valley, MD; FDA approved). The automated EPAD1.0 SSEP device the investigators are currently utilizing is miniaturized and incorporates a proprietary technology utilizing non-invasive electrode patches (rather than needle electrodes) and is based on an automated algorithm derived from real-time SSEP monitoring of over 100,000 surgical procedures. The investigators was the first to evaluate the clinical utility of this automated SSEP device in cardiac surgical and total shoulder arthroplasty patients. These pilot studies found that automated SSEP monitoring can be performed readily in a busy cardiac operating room, as well as in orthopedic surgery. The raw signal quality is reliable and comparable to the conventional SSEP machine. These results indicate that this device can eliminate the practical challenges of performing SSEP monitoring and confirmed its feasibility for routine use. The initial experience has enabled further development that has incorporated software updates based on off-line data-reiteration. This has also allowed progressive refinement of the automated analysis algorithm based on this recently acquired intraoperative SSEP data to progressively optimize the software for improved signal acquisition, enhanced artifact rejection and electrocautery suppression.
METHOD Study Design This will be a prospective cohort study aiming in assessing the ability of a novel automated EMG/SSEP device (EPAD® 2.0) to detect intraoperative spinal nerve root injury in patients undergoing spine procedures. All protocol procedures will be undertaken; however, as this is the first clinical trial of EPAD® 2.0, the initial series of up to 30 patients will be used for feasibility anticipating some possible minor software revisions and minor equipment modifications. Additionally, data obtained from this initial series of patients may be utilized to iteratively refine the data collection and analysis algorithms.
Standard Procedure After obtaining preoperative written consent, a brief neurological exam will be conducted. As is conventional, anesthesia will be induced using opioid/propofol and will be maintained with halogenated anesthetic agents and supplemented with an infusion of remifentanil at 0.01-0.2 mcg/kg/min or sufentanil at 0.15 to 0.5g/kg/hr. Muscle relaxants will only be given for intubation and no second dose will be given to enable EMG monitoring. After anesthesia induction with airway and vascular access secured, the patient will be positioned for the surgery. There is no change in routine (or standard) of care except the investigators will attach the EPAD 2.0 device to the patients. After the surgery, the patient will be extubated and transferred to PACU. In all patients, a complete neurological exam will be performed in PACU.
Study Procedure:
For SSEP monitoring, surface adhesive electrodes will be used for both stimulation and recording. Stimulating electrodes will be placed for stimulation of the dermatome that is at risk of injury (e.g. C5), median nerve or posterior tibal nerve. Recording surface electrodes will be placed on the cervical spine at the C2 level (C2), and the reference electrode was placed on the forehead. The pre-set stimulation frequency in the EPAD device is 4.7 Hz with a 300- microsecond pulse set at 50 to 70 mA and the signal averaging set at 300 cycles. After an automatic impedance check, the baseline subcortical SSEP will be established at the beginning of each case, and the amplitude and latency of the waveforms will be measured. The EPAD device automatically established the baselines.
For EMG monitoring, 6 Surface electrodes will be attached to the same muscle groups of the conventional intraoperative neurophysiological monitoring machine. The underlying skin will be prepared with 3M EKG skin abrasive tape (3M red dot 2236) to reduce the skin impedance. In each case, the Compound Muscle Action Potentials (CMAPs) of each muscle group will be monitored. The EMG monitoring can provide three main functions in spine surgery, which includes free-run EMG for detecting mechanical irritation to nerve root, triggered EMG for nerve root identification and pedicle screw placement assessment. All three EMG functions will be evaluated in this study.
Short Summary of Study Protocol:
- Written informed consent
- Focused neurological exam preoperatively
- Placement of surface electrodes in OR
- Monitoring during the spine procedure to determine the agreement of EPAD® 2.0 with the conventional intraoperative neurophysiological monitoring.
- Postoperative focused neurological exam in PACU postoperatively by blinded observer
- Data analysis/interpretation/presentation/publication
- Conditions
- Spine Disease, Neurological Disorder
- Keywords
- Spine surgery, Neuromonitoring, Evoked potential, electromyography, neurological injury
- Medical subject headings
- Spinal Diseases, Nervous System Diseases, Trauma, Nervous System
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
| Study group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| Automated EMG/SSEP monitored | In this study, all patients will be monitored for SSEP and EMG. For SSEP monitoring, surface adhesive electrodes will be used for both stimulation and recording. After an automatic impedance check, the baseline subcortical SSEP will be established at the beginning of each case, and the amplitude and latency of the waveforms will be measured. For EMG monitoring, 6 Surface electrodes will be attached to the same muscle groups of the conventional intraoperative neurophysiological monitoring machine. In each case, the Compound Muscle Action Potentials (CMAPs) of each muscle group will be monitored. As this is an observational study, no intervention is planned. |
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
The feasibility of using EPAD 2.0 automated device to successfully monitor the patients in spine surgery.
The feasibility is determined by the percentage of patients being successfully monitored in spine surgery using the EPAD 2.0 automated device (i.e. [number of patients being successfully monitored/ total number of patients being recruited]*100).
Measured: Intraoperative
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted20 Feb 2019
- Study startJul 2019 (estimated)
- Primary completionJun 2021 (estimated)
- Study completionJun 2021 (estimated)
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Publications (5)Papers the sponsor has linked to this study.
- Other trials for Spine DiseaseStudies of the same condition, open and under way.
- More trials run by London Health Sciences Centre Research Institute OR Lawson Research Institute of St. Joseph'sThe sponsor's other registered studies.
- 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
- Observational
- Observational model
- Cohort
- Time perspective
- Prospective
- Enrolment
- 30 participants (estimated)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- London Health Sciences Centre Research Institute OR Lawson Research Institute of St. Joseph's
- Sponsor type
- University, hospital or other
- Responsible party
- Principal investigator, Jason Chui, London Health Sciences Centre Research Institute OR Lawson Research Institute of St. Joseph's
- Investigators
- Jason Chui, MBChB, Principal investigator, University of Western Ontario, Canada
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT03848377
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- 112933
- Status last verified
- Mar 2019
- First submitted
- 19 Feb 2019
- Last updated
- 6 Mar 2019
- Results posted
- No
- Data monitoring committee
- No
- FDA-regulated drug
- No
- FDA-regulated device
- No
Publications
Ghobrial GM, Williams KA Jr, Arnold P, Fehlings M, Harrop JS. Iatrogenic neurologic deficit after lumbar spine surgery: A review. Clin Neurol Neurosurg. 2015 Dec;139:76-80. doi: 10.1016/j.clineuro.2015.08.022. Epub 2015 Sep 1.
PubMed 26386902Jimenez JC, Sani S, Braverman B, Deutsch H, Ratliff JK. Palsies of the fifth cervical nerve root after cervical decompression: prevention using continuous intraoperative electromyography monitoring. J Neurosurg Spine. 2005 Aug;3(2):92-7. doi: 10.3171/spi.2005.3.2.0092.
PubMed 16370297Sasai K, Saito T, Akagi S, Kato I, Ohnari H, Iida H. Preventing C5 palsy after laminoplasty. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2003 Sep 1;28(17):1972-7. doi: 10.1097/01.BRS.0000083237.94535.46.
PubMed 12973145Fan D, Schwartz DM, Vaccaro AR, Hilibrand AS, Albert TJ. Intraoperative neurophysiologic detection of iatrogenic C5 nerve root injury during laminectomy for cervical compression myelopathy. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2002 Nov 15;27(22):2499-502. doi: 10.1097/00007632-200211150-00014.
PubMed 12435981Fehlings MG, Brodke DS, Norvell DC, Dettori JR. The evidence for intraoperative neurophysiological monitoring in spine surgery: does it make a difference? Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2010 Apr 20;35(9 Suppl):S37-46. doi: 10.1097/BRS.0b013e3181d8338e.
PubMed 20407350
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 6 Mar 2019. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- A Feasibility Study of a Novel Combined Automated EMG and SSEP Device (EPAD® 2.0) for Intraoperative Monitoring of Spinal Nerve Roots and Spinal Cord Function During Spine Surgery
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT03848377
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- 112933
- Conditions
- Spine Disease, Neurological Disorder
- Keywords
- Spine surgery, Neuromonitoring, Evoked potential, electromyography, neurological injury
- Study type
- Observational
- Recruitment status
- Unknown status
- Enrolment
- 30 participants (estimated)
- Lead sponsor
- London Health Sciences Centre Research Institute OR Lawson Research Institute of St. Joseph'sUniversity, hospital or other
- Study start
- Jul 2019 (estimated)
- Primary completion
- Jun 2021 (estimated)
- Study completion
- Jun 2021 (estimated)
- First posted
- 20 Feb 2019 (actual)
- 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.
In patients undergoing spine surgery, spinal nerve roots and spinal cord are vulnerable to surgical insults especially for instrumentation and may lead to long term sequelae. The incidence of clinical peripheral neuropathy after cervical spine surgery has been reported up to 30%. Intraoperatively, spinal cord and nerves function can be monitored using electromyography (EMG) and somatosensory evoked potentials (SSEP) and thereby, intervention can be made to potentially reduce the incidence of adverse neurological sequelae. However, conventional EMG and SSEP monitoring requires presence of a trained EP technician, use of needle electrodes and currently bulky EP equipment and is thus not practical for routine clinical usage. In this study, the invesitgators will assess the clinical feasibility of using a novel miniaturized and automated EMG/SSEP device (EPAD® 2.0) in spine surgical patients.
Detailed description
Purpose of Research: This study is a pilot study designed to assess the ability of a novel automated EMG/SSEP device (EPAD® 2.0) to detect intraoperative spinal nerve roots injury in patients undergoing spine procedures. The specific aims are:
- to assess the clinical utility of using the EPAD® 2.0 automated device and its algorithm in monitoring spine surgery patients.
- to identify any practical limitation of using EPAD® 2.0 automated device in spine surgery patients.
Hypothesis: the novel automated EPAD® 2.0 EMG/SSEP device is easy to use and apply in spine surgery patients
BACKGROUND Surgical injuries to the spinal nerve roots or spinal cords are not infrequent in spine surgery and the consequence can be devastating. Injured patients might present with radiculopathy, motor weakness, spinal cord compression, and postoperative neuropathic pain. In cervical spine surgery, cervical nerve roots injuries especially fifth cervical (C5) nerve root are not uncommon complications, potentially resulting in upper extremity paralysis. The incidence of C5 nerve root injury ranged to as high as 30%. The other spinal nerve roots (C6-8) can suffer from the same surgical injuries during the procedure but with much lower reported incidence than C5. Spinal nerve injuries typically occur during decompression for cervical myelopathy in both anterior and posterior approaches. In lumbosacral spine surgery, a recent review of the neurological injury found a pooled incidence of 5.7% (56 of 2783 patients; range: 0.46-24%), in which pedicle malposition accounted for one-fifth of the injuries.
A multimodality monitoring such as SSEP and EMG can be used in spine surgery to allow comprehensive monitoring of the spinal cord and nerve roots function and an attempt to reduce the risks of surgical injuries. Although the idea of closely monitoring of spinal cord and nerve roots function during high-risk cervical spine instrumentation procedure is appealing, the utilization of intraoperative neurophysiological monitoring is limited. One reason is the current requirements for a trained technician and for electrode placement and observation of monitoring SSSEP signals, the requirement for the use of needle electrodes for SSEP monitoring and specific training for a neurophysiologist in the interpretation of SSEP signals.
In attempt to resolve this problem, the investigators has been involved in developing an automated SSEP device (EPAD®, SafeOp Surgical, Hunt Valley, MD; FDA approved). The automated EPAD1.0 SSEP device the investigators are currently utilizing is miniaturized and incorporates a proprietary technology utilizing non-invasive electrode patches (rather than needle electrodes) and is based on an automated algorithm derived from real-time SSEP monitoring of over 100,000 surgical procedures. The investigators was the first to evaluate the clinical utility of this automated SSEP device in cardiac surgical and total shoulder arthroplasty patients. These pilot studies found that automated SSEP monitoring can be performed readily in a busy cardiac operating room, as well as in orthopedic surgery. The raw signal quality is reliable and comparable to the conventional SSEP machine. These results indicate that this device can eliminate the practical challenges of performing SSEP monitoring and confirmed its feasibility for routine use. The initial experience has enabled further development that has incorporated software updates based on off-line data-reiteration. This has also allowed progressive refinement of the automated analysis algorithm based on this recently acquired intraoperative SSEP data to progressively optimize the software for improved signal acquisition, enhanced artifact rejection and electrocautery suppression.
METHOD Study Design This will be a prospective cohort study aiming in assessing the ability of a novel automated EMG/SSEP device (EPAD® 2.0) to detect intraoperative spinal nerve root injury in patients undergoing spine procedures. All protocol procedures will be undertaken; however, as this is the first clinical trial of EPAD® 2.0, the initial series of up to 30 patients will be used for feasibility anticipating some possible minor software revisions and minor equipment modifications. Additionally, data obtained from this initial series of patients may be utilized to iteratively refine the data collection and analysis algorithms.
Standard Procedure After obtaining preoperative written consent, a brief neurological exam will be conducted. As is conventional, anesthesia will be induced using opioid/propofol and will be maintained with halogenated anesthetic agents and supplemented with an infusion of remifentanil at 0.01-0.2 mcg/kg/min or sufentanil at 0.15 to 0.5g/kg/hr. Muscle relaxants will only be given for intubation and no second dose will be given to enable EMG monitoring. After anesthesia induction with airway and vascular access secured, the patient will be positioned for the surgery. There is no change in routine (or standard) of care except the investigators will attach the EPAD 2.0 device to the patients. After the surgery, the patient will be extubated and transferred to PACU. In all patients, a complete neurological exam will be performed in PACU.
Study Procedure:
For SSEP monitoring, surface adhesive electrodes will be used for both stimulation and recording. Stimulating electrodes will be placed for stimulation of the dermatome that is at risk of injury (e.g. C5), median nerve or posterior tibal nerve. Recording surface electrodes will be placed on the cervical spine at the C2 level (C2), and the reference electrode was placed on the forehead. The pre-set stimulation frequency in the EPAD device is 4.7 Hz with a 300- microsecond pulse set at 50 to 70 mA and the signal averaging set at 300 cycles. After an automatic impedance check, the baseline subcortical SSEP will be established at the beginning of each case, and the amplitude and latency of the waveforms will be measured. The EPAD device automatically established the baselines.
For EMG monitoring, 6 Surface electrodes will be attached to the same muscle groups of the conventional intraoperative neurophysiological monitoring machine. The underlying skin will be prepared with 3M EKG skin abrasive tape (3M red dot 2236) to reduce the skin impedance. In each case, the Compound Muscle Action Potentials (CMAPs) of each muscle group will be monitored. The EMG monitoring can provide three main functions in spine surgery, which includes free-run EMG for detecting mechanical irritation to nerve root, triggered EMG for nerve root identification and pedicle screw placement assessment. All three EMG functions will be evaluated in this study.
Short Summary of Study Protocol:
- Written informed consent
- Focused neurological exam preoperatively
- Placement of surface electrodes in OR
- Monitoring during the spine procedure to determine the agreement of EPAD® 2.0 with the conventional intraoperative neurophysiological monitoring.
- Postoperative focused neurological exam in PACU postoperatively by blinded observer
- Data analysis/interpretation/presentation/publication
Study design
- Observational model
- Cohort
- Time perspective
- Prospective
- Number of arms
- 1
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| Automated EMG/SSEP monitored | – | –In this study, all patients will be monitored for SSEP and EMG. For SSEP monitoring, surface adhesive electrodes will be used for both stimulation and recording. After an automatic impedance check, the baseline subcortical SSEP will be established at the beginning of each case, and the amplitude and latency of the waveforms will be measured. For EMG monitoring, 6 Surface electrodes will be attached to the same muscle groups of the conventional intraoperative neurophysiological monitoring machine. In each case, the Compound Muscle Action Potentials (CMAPs) of each muscle group will be monitored. As this is an observational study, no intervention is planned. |
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 18 years and older
- Sex
- All
- Healthy volunteers
- Not accepted
- Age groups
- Adult, Older adult
- Study population
- Study Participants: 30 patients who are scheduled to have spine surgery in LHSC.
Key inclusion criteria (2 listed)
- Adult patient (age>18 years old)
- Scheduled to have either cervical or lumbosacral spine surgery. We include all patients who will undergo either single or multiple instrumented or non-instrumented decompression/fusion with either allograft or autograft bone with a preoperative diagnosis of cervical stenosis, radiculopathy, herniated nucleus pulposus, junctional stenosis, or non-union from prior surgery.
Key exclusion criteria (6 listed)
- Age <18 years old
- BMI>40
- Unable to perform preoperative neurological examination such as the language barrier
- Fluctuating neurological signs/symptoms (eg. recent CVA, peripheral neuropathy, etc)
- Unable to obtain informed consent
Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening; this overview does not establish that a patient qualifies. Full inclusion and exclusion criteria.
Primary outcome
The feasibility of using EPAD 2.0 automated device to successfully monitor the patients in spine surgery.
Time frame: Intraoperative
The feasibility is determined by the percentage of patients being successfully monitored in spine surgery using the EPAD 2.0 automated device (i.e. [number of patients being successfully monitored/ total number of patients being recruited]*100).
Results and safety
Results are not available in the source record.
Research links
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govLast updated by the sponsor 6 Mar 2019.
- Background: PubMed 26386902Ghobrial GM, Williams KA Jr, Arnold P, Fehlings M, Harrop JS. Iatrogenic neurologic deficit after lumbar spine surgery: A review. Clin Neurol Neurosurg. 2015 Dec;139:76-80. doi: 10.1016/j.clineuro.2015.08.022. Epub 2015 Sep 1.
- Background: PubMed 16370297Jimenez JC, Sani S, Braverman B, Deutsch H, Ratliff JK. Palsies of the fifth cervical nerve root after cervical decompression: prevention using continuous intraoperative electromyography monitoring. J Neurosurg Spine. 2005 Aug;3(2):92-7. doi: 10.3171/spi.2005.3.2.0092.
- Background: PubMed 12973145Sasai K, Saito T, Akagi S, Kato I, Ohnari H, Iida H. Preventing C5 palsy after laminoplasty. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2003 Sep 1;28(17):1972-7. doi: 10.1097/01.BRS.0000083237.94535.46.
- Background: PubMed 12435981Fan D, Schwartz DM, Vaccaro AR, Hilibrand AS, Albert TJ. Intraoperative neurophysiologic detection of iatrogenic C5 nerve root injury during laminectomy for cervical compression myelopathy. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2002 Nov 15;27(22):2499-502. doi: 10.1097/00007632-200211150-00014.
- Background: PubMed 20407350Fehlings MG, Brodke DS, Norvell DC, Dettori JR. The evidence for intraoperative neurophysiological monitoring in spine surgery: does it make a difference? Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2010 Apr 20;35(9 Suppl):S37-46. doi: 10.1097/BRS.0b013e3181d8338e.
Related trials for Spine Disease
Not yet recruitingPhase 2
Extension Study of Safety and Tolerability of DDY391 in Participants With Moderate to Severe Psoriatic Arthritis (CDDY391A12201-extension)
Moderate to Severe Psoriatic Arthritis
Active, not recruiting
Effects of Resistance Exercise on Enthesitis in Patients With Spondyloarthritis
Spondyloarthritis (SpA), Axial Spondylarthritis (axSpA)
Recruiting
Efficacy of a Self-Management Smartphone App to Improve Safety Skills in Patients With Inflammatory Arthritis
Rhumatoid Arthisis, Spondyloarthritis (SA)
Not yet recruiting
A Comparison of the Effects of Exercise Methods for Adolescent Hyperkyphosis on the Sensorimotor System
Kyphosis Postural Thoracic, Kyphosis
RecruitingPhase 1
A Study of HB0017 Injection in Healthy Volunteers to Evaluate Safety and Tolerability of a Single Subcutaneous Injection in Low-Body-Weight Subjects; and Pharmacokinetics at Different Subcutaneous Injection Sites at the Same Dose
Psoriasis, Ankylosing Spondylitis
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.
Jason Chui, MBChB principal investigator
University of Western Ontario, Canada
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
An observational study of Spine Disease and Neurological Disorder, run by London Health Sciences Centre Research Institute OR Lawson Research Institute of St. Joseph's.
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 2 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: status not confirmed, as of the sponsor's last update on 6 Mar 2019. 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?
Contact Jason Chui, MBChB (5196858500 ext. 35625, jason.chui@lhsc.on.ca), or a site near the patient. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.
What does the primary outcome measure?
The feasibility of using EPAD 2.0 automated device to successfully monitor the patients in spine surgery. (time frame: Intraoperative). 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 NCT03848377, which also lists 5 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 6 Mar 2019.