Superion® InterSpinous Spacer for treatment of moderate degenerative lumbar spinal stenosis: durable three-year results of a randomized controlled trial

被引:18
|
作者
Patel, Vikas V. [1 ]
Nunley, Pierce D. [2 ]
Whang, Peter G. [3 ]
Haley, Thomas R. [4 ]
Bradley, W. Daniel [5 ]
Davis, Raphael P. [6 ]
Block, Jon E.
Geisler, Fred H. [7 ]
机构
[1] Univ Colorado Hosp, Spine Ctr, Denver, CO USA
[2] Spine Inst Louisiana, Shreveport, LA USA
[3] Yale Univ, Sch Med, Dept Orthopaed & Rehabil, New Haven, CT 06510 USA
[4] Performance Spine & Sports Phys PC, Pottstown, PA USA
[5] Texas Back Inst, Denton, TX USA
[6] Stony Brook Med, Dept Neurol Surg, Stony Brook, NY USA
[7] McLaren Hosp, Petoskey, MI USA
来源
关键词
InterSpinous Spacer; lumbar spinal stenosis; Superion (R); neurogenic claudication; COMPLICATIONS; OUTCOMES; SURGERY; TRENDS;
D O I
10.2147/JPR.S92633
中图分类号
R74 [神经病学与精神病学];
学科分类号
摘要
Purpose: This report provides the 3-year clinical outcomes from the randomized, controlled US Food and Drug Administration Investigational Device Exemption trial of the Superion (R) for the treatment of moderate degenerative lumbar spinal stenosis. Patients and methods: The Superion (R) was evaluated in the treatment of subjects aged 45 years or older suffering from symptoms of intermittent neurogenic claudication, secondary to a confirmed diagnosis of moderate degenerative lumbar spinal stenosis at one or two contiguous levels from L1 to L5. Patients were treated between June 2008 and December 2011 at 31 investigational sites. Three hundred ninety-one subjects were included in the randomized study group consisting of 190 Superion (R) and 201 X-STOP (R) control subjects. The primary composite endpoint was individual patient success based on four components: improvement in two of three domains of the Zurich Claudication Questionnaire, no reoperations at the index level, no major implant/ procedure-related complications, and no clinically significant confounding treatments. Results: At 3 years, the proportion of subjects achieving the primary composite endpoint was greater for Superion (R) (63/ 120, 52.5%) than for X-STOP (R) (49/ 129, 38.0%) (P=0.023) and the corresponding success rates exceeded 80% for each of the individual components of the primary endpoint in the Superion (R) group (range: 81%-91%). Improvements in back and leg pain severity as well as back-and disease-specific functional outcomes were also maintained through 36 months. Conclusion: The 3-year outcomes from this randomized controlled trial demonstrate durable clinical improvement consistently across all clinical outcomes for the Superion (R) in the treatment of patients with moderate degenerative lumbar spinal stenosis.
引用
收藏
页码:657 / 662
页数:6
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [41] Effect of a prototype lumbar spinal stenosis belt versus a lumbar support on walking capacity in lumbar spinal stenosis: a randomized controlled trial
    Ammendolia, Carlo
    Rampersaud, Y. Raja
    Southerst, Danielle
    Ahmed, Aksa
    Schneider, Michael
    Hawker, Gillian
    Bombardier, Claire
    Cote, Pierre
    SPINE JOURNAL, 2019, 19 (03): : 386 - 394
  • [42] Two-year results of interspinous spacer (X-Stop) implantation in 175 patients with neurologic intermittent claudication due to lumbar spinal stenosis
    Kuchta, Johannes
    Sobottke, Rolf
    Eysel, Peer
    Simons, Patrick
    EUROPEAN SPINE JOURNAL, 2009, 18 (06) : 823 - 829
  • [43] Three-Year Follow-up of the Prospective, Randomized, Controlled Trial of Coflex Interlaminar Stabilization vs Instrumented Fusion in Patients With Lumbar Stenosis
    Bae, Hyun W.
    Davis, Reginald J.
    Lauryssen, Carl
    Leary, Scott
    Maislin, Greg
    Musacchio, Michael J., Jr.
    NEUROSURGERY, 2016, 79 (02) : 169 - 180
  • [44] Achieving Optimal Outcome for Degenerative Lumbar Spondylolisthesis: Randomized Controlled Trial Results
    Ghogawala, Zoher
    Resnick, Daniel K.
    Glassman, Steven D.
    Dziura, James
    Shaffrey, Christopher I.
    Mummaneni, Praveen V.
    NEUROSURGERY, 2017, 64 : 40 - 44
  • [45] Surgery Versus Nonsurgical Treatment of Lumbar Spinal Stenosis A Randomized Trial
    Delitto, Anthony
    Piva, Sara R.
    Moore, Charity G.
    Fritz, Julie M.
    Wisniewski, Stephen R.
    Josbeno, Deborah A.
    Fye, Mark
    Welch, William C.
    ANNALS OF INTERNAL MEDICINE, 2015, 162 (07) : 465 - U120
  • [46] Three-year results of a randomized controlled trial comparing mechanochemical and thermal ablation in the treatment of insufficient great saphenous veins
    Vahaaho, Sari
    Halmesmaki, Karolina
    Mahmoud, Osman
    Alback, Anders
    Noronen, Katarina
    Venermo, Maarit
    JOURNAL OF VASCULAR SURGERY-VENOUS AND LYMPHATIC DISORDERS, 2021, 9 (03) : 652 - 659
  • [47] Interspinous process device versus standard conventional surgical decompression for lumbar spinal stenosis: randomised controlled trial
    Moojen, Wouter A.
    Arts, Mark P.
    Jacobs, Wilco C. H.
    van Zwet, Erik W.
    van den Akker-van Marle, M. Elske
    Koes, Bart W.
    Vleggeert-Lankamp, Carmen L. A. M.
    Peul, Wilco C.
    BRITISH JOURNAL OF SPORTS MEDICINE, 2015, 49 (02) : 135 - 135
  • [48] The boot camp program for lumbar spinal stenosis: A protocol for a randomized controlled trial
    Ammendolia C.
    Côté P.
    Rampersaud Y.R.
    Southerst D.
    Budgell B.
    Bombardier C.
    Hawker G.
    Chiropractic & Manual Therapies, 24 (1)
  • [49] MILD® is an Effective Treatment for Lumbar Spinal Stenosis with Neurogenic Claudication: MiDAS ENCORE Randomized Controlled Trial
    Benyamin, Ramsin M.
    Staats, Peter S.
    PAIN PHYSICIAN, 2016, 19 (04) : 229 - 242
  • [50] A PILOT RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL OF FLEXION-DISTRACTION DOSAGE FOR CHIROPRACTIC TREATMENT OF LUMBAR SPINAL STENOSIS
    Cambron, Jerrilyn A.
    Schneider, Michael
    Dexheimer, Jennifer M.
    Iannelli, Grant
    Chang, Mabel
    Terhorst, Lauren
    Cramer, Gregory D.
    JOURNAL OF MANIPULATIVE AND PHYSIOLOGICAL THERAPEUTICS, 2014, 37 (06) : 396 - 406