AzTrials
AzTrials

Osteoporotic Fracture of VertebraNCT05519332

Percutaneous Vertebral-disc Plasty for Thoracolumbar Very Severe Osteoporotic Vertebral Compression Fractures

A study testing percutaneous vertebral-disc plasty in people with Osteoporotic Fracture of Vertebra, run by Jiawei Jiang at 1 site in China.

Recruiting

Looking for participants now. Contact the study team or a site below to ask about taking part.

Sites and contacts
Official record
Search all trials

Trial summary

Purpose: To compare the clinical outcomes and radiological parameters of patients undergoing percutaneous vertebroplasty (PVP) versus those undergoing percutaneous vertebral-disc plasty (PVDP) for back pain, segmental instability, and kyphosis due to thoracolumbar very severe osteoporotic vertebral compression… Read more about this study

Who is it for?
Ages 58 to 84 years
Conditions the study is for
Osteoporotic Fracture of Vertebra
What is being tested?
percutaneous vertebral-disc plasty
Type of treatment
Surgery or procedure
Could I receive a placebo?
No, everyone receives an active treatment
How many people
100 participants
Where
1 siteChina
Study dates
1 Mar 2020to Dec 2025
Phase
Interventional
Are there results?
Not yet: the study is under way

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 58 to 84 years
  • All sexes
  • No healthy volunteers
  • Adult, Older adult

Who may be able to join

  • bone mineral density T scores <-2.5;
  • compression of the vertebral anterior column greater than two-thirds of their original height;
  • Kyphosis with LKA greater than 20°;
  • the accordion phenomenon: the different angles of a supine CT scan and a lateral standing X-ray measurement;
  • upper or lower vertebral endplate fracture;
  • the involved vertebral body was intact;
  • Elderly patients with a history of major illness (such as cardiovascular disease, cancer or active malignancy) and were intolerant of the traditional open surgery.

Who cannot join

  • Pathological vertebral fractures caused by spinal tumors, spinal tuberculosis, and spinal infection and so on;
  • Patients with symptoms of nerve roots or spinal cord compression;
  • Patients with a previous history of spinal fusion;
  • A history of abnormal bleeding or coagulation disorder dysfunction.

Trial locations and contacts

1 site in 1 country. Contact the study team or a site near you to ask about taking part.

Jiawei Jiang, Dr contact

18862802782

18862802782@163.com

China1 site, 1 recruiting
  • Affiliated 2 Hospital of Nantong University

    Nantong, Jiangsu, 0513

    Jiawei Jiang, Dr, 18862802782, 18862802782@163.com

    Hongqing Xu, Dr

    Recruiting

Other trials in China

About this study

Purpose: To compare the clinical outcomes and radiological parameters of patients undergoing percutaneous vertebroplasty (PVP) versus those undergoing percutaneous vertebral-disc plasty (PVDP) for back pain, segmental instability, and kyphosis due to thoracolumbar very severe osteoporotic vertebral compression fractures (vsOVCFs).

This prospective study included elderly patients with thoracolumbar vsOVCFs. All the patients were randomly allocated into the PVP group (who underwent conventional PVP) and the PVDP group (who underwent PVP combined percutaneous cement discoplasty). The visual analogue scale (VAS), Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), local kyphosis angle, and disc height were recorded preoperatively and postoperatively.

Read the detailed description

Patients diagnosed with thoracolumbar vsOVCFs in hospital and undergoing minimally invasive treatment from November 2019 to March 2021 were enrolled for the study. They were randomly allocated into two groups (based on random numbers generated by www. randomizer.org), namely PVP group and PVDP group.

Operative technique:In PVDP group, PVP and PCD both used a unilateral transpedicular approach into the vertebrae and disc. . Under general anesthesia, the patient was turned over to a prone position, and the deformity is reduced with a slight closed manipulative. Firstly, under fluoroscopic O-arm guidance, the puncture site was localized into the junction made by the transverse process and the superior articular process and entered the target area according to the puncture angle and depth measured before the operation. Secondly, the other puncture cannula was inserted into the intervertebral disc space adjacent to the ruptured endplate through the transpedicular access, and the target area was the middle of the intervertebral space. Thin-cut CT images were obtained intraoperatively by the O-arm fluoroscopy to confirm puncture needle placement location. Third, the bone cement was injected into the vertebrae and the intervertebral disc space, meanwhile, the cannula was also needed to move back to the vertebrae, and the bone cement in the vertebrae could connect the intervertebral disc space and the vertebrae to form a whole. Finally, the PVP group and the adjacent vertebrae performed by prophylactic vertebroplasty used bilateral pedicle puncture, under the guidance of the O-arm, two puncture needles were percutaneously inserted into the vertebrae, reaching about the middle of the vertebrae. Then, cement was slowly injected into the vertebral body, once cement leakage into the spinal canal or veins was detected, the injection was stopped.

The investigators measured radiological parameters including the local kyphotic angle (LKA), disc height anterior (DHA), and disc height posterior (DHP) from lateral plain radiographs preoperatively and at 1 day and final follow-up after surgery. The visual analog score (VAS) was used to assess the preoperative and postoperative back pain relief. The Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) was used to assess the quality of life and was recorded preoperatively, postoperatively, and final follow-up.

Being tested
percutaneous vertebral-disc plasty
Keywords
percutaneous vertebroplasty, percutaneous cement discoplasty

What participants receive

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

  • percutaneous vertebral-disc plastyProcedure or surgery

    percutaneous vertebroplasty combined percutaneous cement discoplasty

Study groups in NCT05519332
Study groupRoleWhat they receive
PVDP groupExperimentalPatients underwent percutaneous vertebral-disc plasty
Receives: Procedure: percutaneous vertebral-disc plasty
PVP groupNo interventionPatients underwent conventional percutaneous vertebroplasty

What is being measured

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

  1. Change from Baseline visual analogue scale

    Using a ruler, the score is determined by measuring the distance (mm) on the 10-cm line between the "no pain" anchor and the patient's mark, providing a range of scores from 0 to 100. A higher score indicates greater pain intensity. Based on the distribution of pain Visual Analogue Scale scores in post-surgical patients who described their postoperative pain intensity as none, mild, moderate, or severe, the following cut points on the pain Visual Analogue Scale have been recommended: no pain (0-4 mm), mild pain(5-44 mm), moderate pain (45-74 mm), and severe pain (75-100 mm).

    Measured: One day before operation, one day after operation and 1year.

  2. Change from Baseline Oswestry Disability Index

    The ODI assesses ten aspects of daily functions viz. pain intensity, personal care, lifting, walking, sitting, standing, sleeping, sex life, social life and travelling. An ODI of 0-20% indicates minimal disability; the patients can cope with most living activities and usually no treatment is indicated, apart from advice on lifting, sitting and exercise. An ODI of 21-40% indicates moderate disability; the patients experience more pain and difficulty with sitting, lifting and standing; travel and social life are more difficult and they may be disabled from work; personal care, sexual activity and sleeping are not grossly affected. An ODI of 41-60% indicates severe disability; pain remains the main problem in this group of patients; the activities of daily living are affected. Patients with an ODI of 61-80% are severely crippled in function with back pain impinging on all aspects of the patient's life. Finally, an ODI of 81-100% indicates that the patients are bed-bound.

    Measured: One day before operation, one day after operation and 1year.

  3. Change from Baseline the local kyphotic angle

    The local kyphotic angle (LKA) was calculated by a measurement called Cobb's method, which measured the angle between the superior endplate of the upper vertebrae and the inferior endplate of the lower vertebrae. Use this to assess the degree of local kyphosis of the spine.

    Measured: One day before operation, one day after operation and 1year.

Secondary outcomes (2)
  1. Change from Baseline the disc height anterior

    Disc height anterior(DHA) was measured from the anterior points of the disc on lateral plain radiographs. It is used to assess the degree of height loss at the anterior border of the intervertebral space.

    Measured: One day before operation, one day after operation and 1year.

  2. Change from Baseline the disc height posterior

    Disc height posterior (DHP) was measured from the posterior points of the disc on lateral plain radiographs. It is used to assess the degree of height loss at the posterior border of the intervertebral space.

    Measured: One day before operation, one day after operation and 1year.

Timeline

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

  1. First posted29 Aug 2022
  2. Study start1 Mar 2020
  3. Primary completionJul 2025 (estimated)
  4. Study completionDec 2025 (estimated)

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
Masking
Single blind
Who is masked
Participant
Enrolment
100 participants (estimated)
IDs, dates and publications
ClinicalTrials.gov ID
NCT05519332
Sponsor's protocol ID
JJiang
Status last verified
Apr 2025
First submitted
24 Aug 2022
Last updated
4 Apr 2025
Results posted
No
FDA-regulated drug
No
FDA-regulated device
No
Individual data sharing
No

Questions about this trial

What is this clinical trial studying?

A study testing percutaneous vertebral-disc plasty in people with Osteoporotic Fracture of Vertebra, run by Jiawei Jiang at 1 site in China.

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 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: looking for participants now, as of the sponsor's last update on 4 Apr 2025. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.

Where is the study taking place?

The record lists 1 site in China. 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. 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?

This study is still under way. Results are not available in the source record yet.

How can a doctor refer a patient or contact the research team?

Contact Jiawei Jiang, Dr (18862802782, 18862802782@163.com), or a site near the patient. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.

What does the primary outcome measure?

Change from Baseline visual analogue scale (time frame: One day before operation, one day after operation and 1year.). The study lists 3 primary outcomes in all. 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 4 Apr 2025.

Free account

Log in to keep searching

You’ve used your 3 free searches. AzTrials is free: log in or create a free account to keep searching clinical trials and save the ones you want to follow.

Create a free accountLog in