Osteoporotic vertebral fractures (OVF) represent a significant cause of morbidity, mortality, decreased level of function and quality of life. The most severe OVFs are unstable and in these cases surgical stabilization, with various techniques, is considered necessary to restore the physiological loading capacity of the spine, and allow fast and painless mobilization. Unfortunately, the elderly, osteoporotic patient population poses serious challenges to spinal surgery, due to tissue frailty and frequent comorbidities. The purpose of this study is to evaluate the effectiveness and safety of the SAIF intervention in comparison with multilevel surgical stabilization in participants with unstable OVFs.
Osteoporosis is an increasing health problem worldwide with an enormous economic burden for society. Osteoporotic vertebral fractures (OVF) represent a significant cause of morbidity, mortality, decreased level of function and quality of life. Stable fractures with controllable pain can be managed conservatively, and only those that remain painful despite conservative treatment can be treated with minimally-invasive measures of vertebral augmentation (VA). At the other end of the spectrum, the most severe OVFs are unstable. In these cases standard vertebral augmentation techniques are generally considered an under-treatment and surgical stabilization, with various techniques, is considered necessary to restore the physiological loading capacity of the spine, and allow fast and painless mobilization. Unfortunately, this elderly, osteoporotic patient population poses serious challenges to spinal surgery, due to tissue frailty and frequent comorbidities. More specifically, all the surgical stabilization techniques include rigid posterior fixation of multiple spinal segments, but the reduced bone mechanical properties of osteoporotic patients can lead to hardware implant failure, new fractures, complications, and need of re-intervention. On the other hand, treatment and reinforcement of the anterior spinal column, that should enhance posterior stabilization, requires a more invasive surgical approach, which carries a significant rate of complications and prolonged recovery times in this elderly population. A recently described minimally-invasive interventional technique, called Stent-screw Assisted Internal Fixation (SAIF), can reconstruct, stabilize and restore axial load capability of the vertebral body affected by severe fractures, potentially obviating the need of a surgical multi-level rigid construct. The study seeks primarily to determine whether the SAIF intervention is not inferior to surgical stabilization in improving quality of life in subjects with unstable OVFs at one year follow-up. The principle secondary objective of this study is to evaluate whether the effect of the SAIF intervention on the radiological outcome is not inferior to surgical stabilization in subjects with OVFs. Other secondary objectives are to compare both treatments in terms of safety, length of operation, blood loss, days of hospitalization postoperatively, pain, the intake of analgesics, disability and cost-effectiveness. The total expected number of patients to randomized is 140, 70 per group. This ensures 80% power to test the hypothesis that SAIF is not inferior to surgical stabilization in increasing quality of life measured with the QUALEFFO questionnaire, assuming a standard deviation of 16 points, with a non-inferiority margin of 8 points. This also ensures over 90% power to exclude a non-inferiority margin of 4 degrees of kyphosis correction. The alpha for testing is set at 5%. Estimated duration for the main investigational plan will be 60 months (from start of screening of first subject to last subject processed and finishing the study).
Study Type
INTERVENTIONAL
Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Purpose
TREATMENT
Masking
NONE
Enrollment
140
Implanting vertebral body stents (VBS), followed by insertion of percutaneous, fenestrated, cement-augmented pedicular screws
Spinal fixation with cement augmented pedicle screws bridging the fractured vertebra
EOC Lugano
Lugano, Canton Ticino, Switzerland
Change in the Quality of Life questionnaire of the European Foundation of Osteoporosis (QUALEFFO) score.
The QUALEFFO score is patient-reported and comprises 41 items on five domains: pain, physical function, social function, general health perception, and mental function. All answers are standardized so that 1 represents the best and 5 (or 3, or 4) represents the worst quality of life. The total score is calculated by summing all answers of questions 1-41. The raw total score ranges from 41 to 205 and this is transformed to scores from 0 to 100. A high score indicates a poor quality of life.
Time frame: at 12 months from baseline.
restoration of angular kyphosis at index level
Restoration of angular kyphosis at index level (local kyphotic angle LKA and vertebral kyphotic angle VKA) comparing pre-operative with postoperative standing radiographs (local) and full spine standing radiographs at follow-up. This will be quantified as kyphosis correction at the index level in degrees. The non-inferiority margin is determined at 4 degrees.
Time frame: pre-operative and at 1, 6 and 12 months follow up
vertebral body height restoration
Vertebral body height restoration (anterior VB, mid VB, post VB, or ratio of these) comparing pre- and post-operative computed tomography (CT) scan.
Time frame: Baseline and 1 day after the intervention
global kyphosis/lordosis
Calculation of the Cobb angle at the thoracic and lumbar segments using a full spine stanting radiograph
Time frame: pre-operative and at 1, 6 and 12 months follow up
Global Sagittal Balance
Calculation of Sagittal Vertical Axis assessed with full spine stanting radiographs
Time frame: pre-operative and at 1, 6 and 12 months follow up
length of operation
minutes from skin insertion to skin closure during the tratment
Time frame: Perioperative
blood loss
blood transfusion from the beginning of the intervention to discharge
Time frame: up to 1 week
days of hospitalization postoperatively
the number of days between the intervention and discharge. In case of outpatient (day surgery), the days of hospitalization are zero
Time frame: up to a week
back pain
back pain measured with the numeric rating score (NRS): 11-point NRS ranging from 0 (no pain at all) to 10 (the worst imaginable pain). A score of zero (0) will indicate that the patient is pain free, while a score of ten (10) will indicate that they are experiencing the worst pain imaginable.
Time frame: at baseline and at 1, 3, 6 and 12 months follow up
the intake of analgesics using the Medication Quantification Scale (MQS).
The score is calculated for each medication by taking a consensus-based detriment weight for a given pharmacologic class and multiplying it by a score for dosage. The calculated values for each medication are then summed for a total MQS score
Time frame: at baseline and at 1, 3, 6 and 12 months follow up
disability using Roland-Morris disability questionnaire (RMDQ)
24 items that assess functional status over the past 24 hours in patients with back pain. The total score ranges from 0 to 24: 0 = no disability 24 = maximum disability related to low back pain. A change in 2-3 points on the RDQ is considered the minimum clinically important change.
Time frame: at 1, 3, 6 and 12 months follow up
cost-effectiveness
two outcomes are combined: the quality-adjusted life year (QALY) that takes into account the quantity (longevity/mortality) and the health-related quality of life (HRQoL), and costs that include health care related costs, costs to patients and family, and costs related to paid and unpaid home care.
Time frame: up to 12 months.
This platform is for informational purposes only and does not constitute medical advice. Always consult a qualified healthcare professional.