InSpace sub-acromial tissue spacer system
DeviceArthroscopic implantation of InSpace sub-acromial tissue spacer system
NCT Number: NCT02493660
A pivotal study to assess the safety and effectiveness of the InSpace™ device implantation in comparison to surgical partial repair of full thickness Massive Rotator Cuff Tear (MRCT).
Looking for future studies?
Notify Me40 year–100 year
All sexes
Interventional
Not applicable
Fowler Kennedy Sport Medicine Clinic, London, Ontario, Canada
This is a non-inferiority, prospective, single blinded, multi-center, randomized, controlled, pivotal study evaluating the safety and effectiveness of the InSpace™ device as a primary surgical treatment for full thickness MRCT in comparison to Partial Repair of a full thickness MRCT performed during an arthroscopic procedure.
Healthy volunteers accepted: No
Only the study team can determine whether someone qualifies for participation.
Main Inclusion Criteria:
Main Exclusion Criteria:
Arthroscopic implantation of InSpace sub-acromial tissue spacer system
Arthroscopic partial repair of rotator cuff
Time frame: Baseline to month 12
The primary composite effectiveness endpoint was defined as achievement of improvement for the Western Ontario Rotator Cuff (WORC) score (≥275 points) and American Shoulder and Elbow Society (ASES) score (≥6.4 points) by week 6 and maintenance at month 12 without subsequent secondary surgical intervention (SSSI) or serious adverse device effects (SADEs).
The improvement of points of the Western Ontario Rotator Cuff (WORC) of at least 275 (point scale of 0-2100:lower score is better) and American Shoulder and Elbow Society (ASES) at least 6.4 (point scale of 0-100:higher score is better) reflect the required number of points in improvement for treatment to be considered successful.
Time frame: Baseline through to Month 24
Composite Endpoint Per Protocol Population (PP) of WORC Improvement ≥ 275 and ASES Improvement ≥ 6.4 from baseline at Week 6 Maintained at Month 24 with no Subsequent Secondary Surgical Intervention (SSSI) and no Serious Adverse Device Effect (SADEs) (pre-specified).
Time frame: Baseline to month 12
The secondary effectiveness endpoint was defined as a composite component-level success at Month 12 for Western Ontario Rotator Cuff (WORC) total score improvement (≥275) (scale of 0-2100:lower score is better) in the two groups, InSpace and Partial Repair without subsequent secondary surgical intervention (SSSI) or serious adverse device effects (SADEs).
Time frame: Baseline to month 12
The secondary endpoint was defined as a composite component-level success for American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons ( ASES) compared at baseline to Month 12 without subsequent secondary surgical intervention (SSSI) or serious adverse device effects (SADEs)..
The total score improvement of (≥ 6.4 points) (scale of 0-100:higher score is better) from baseline in the two groups, InSpace and Partial Repair.
Time frame: Baseline through to month 24
The secondary effectiveness endpoint was defined as mean change from baseline to Month 24 for Western Ontario Rotator Cuff (WORC) total score improvement (≥275) (scale of 0-2100:lower score is better) in the two groups, InSpace and Partial Repair.
Time frame: Baseline through to month 24
Mean change in American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES) score from baseline to month 24.
The improvement of points of the American Shoulder and Elbow Society (ASES) at least 6.4 (point scale of 0-100:higher score is better) reflect the required number of points in improvement for treatment to be considered successful.
Time frame: Baseline to month 24
The secondary effectiveness endpoint was defined as mean change from baseline to Month 24 for Constant-Murley (CS) Shoulder Outcome score (where the scale of 0-100:higher score is better) in the two groups, InSpace and Partial Repair.
Time frame: Baseline through to month 24
The secondary effectiveness endpoint was defined as change in baseline to Month 24 for Quality of Life (EQ-5D-5L) (scale of 0-100: lower score better) in the two groups, InSpace and Partial Repair.
Time frame: Baseline through to month 24
The secondary effectiveness endpoint was defined as the mean change from baseline at Month 24 for Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) (scale of 0-100:lower score is better) in the two groups, InSpace and Partial Repair.
Time frame: Baseline through to month 24
The secondary effectiveness endpoint was defined as mean change from baseline at Month 24 for American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES) range of motion (ROM)-physician reported portion. (scale of 0-180 Degrees: higher score is better) in the two groups, InSpace and Partial Repair.
OrthoSpace Ltd.
Industry
A Prospective, Single Blinded, Multi-center, Randomized, Controlled, Pivotal Study to Assess the Safety and Effectiveness of the InSpace™ Device for Treatment of Full Thickness Massive Rotator Cuff Tears
OpenTrials presents study information sourced from ClinicalTrials.gov. The official registry record should be consulted for the latest information.
View the official ClinicalTrials.gov record (opens in a new tab)This listing is for discovery and informational purposes only. It is not medical advice, does not guarantee that a study is recruiting, and does not determine eligibility. Contact the study team and a qualified healthcare professional when considering participation.
Published trials that share one or more normalized conditions with this study.
NCT07294729
Rotator Cuff Injuries, Rotator Cuff Syndrome
Istanbul, Beykoz, Turkey (Türkiye)
View Trial DetailsNCT07587502
Rotator Cuff Syndrome, Rotator Cuff Tendinopathy
Gujranwala, Punjab Province, Pakistan
View Trial DetailsNCT07458711
Joint Diseases, Musculoskeletal Diseases
Lahore, Punjab Province, Pakistan
View Trial DetailsNCT06786013
Rotator Cuff Syndrome
Konya, Turkey (Türkiye)
View Trial Details