Skip to main content
OpenTrials
Completed

NCT Number: NCT00534235

Post-Approval Clinical Trial Comparing the Long Term Safety and Effectiveness Coflex vs. Fusion to Treat Lumbar Spinal Stenosis

Post-Approval Clinical Study Comparing the Long Term Safety and Effectiveness of coflex vs. Fusion to Treat Lumbar Spinal Stenosis

Completed

Looking for future studies?

Notify Me

Key information

Study type

Interventional

Phase

Not applicable

About this study

The primary objective of this post-approval study is to examine the long-term survivorship of the coflex®. The coflex® Interlaminar Technology is an interlaminar stabilization device indicated for use in one or two level lumbar stenosis from L1-L5 in skeletally mature patients with at least moderate impairment in function, who experience relief in flexion from their symptoms of leg/buttocks/groin pain, with or without back pain, and who have undergone at least 6 months of non-operative treatment. The coflex® is intended to be implanted midline between adjacent lamina of 1 or 2 contiguous lumbar motion segments. Interlaminar stabilization is performed after decompression of stenosis at the affected level(s).

Who can participate

Healthy volunteers accepted: No

Only the study team can determine whether someone qualifies for participation.

Treatment and study plan

Decompression

Procedure

Either microsurgical decompression or laminotomy to remove bone impinging on nerves causes the patient pain

Posterolateral Fusion and Implantation of Pedicle Screws

Device

Implantation of coflex Interlaminar Technology

Device

Primary outcomes

  1. Number of Subjects With Improvement of at Least 15 Points in ODI

    Time frame: 5 years

    The primary variable of performance is the assessment of Oswestry Low Back Pain Disability Index (ODI) in both treatment groups at 5 years. It will be assessed if the improvement in ODI since the pre surgery status in the coflex™ group is better than the improvement in the control group (scale 0-100 with a higher score representing increased disability).

  2. Number of Subjects With no Reoperations, Revisions, Removals, or Supplemental Fixation

    Time frame: 5 years

    Assessment of secondary surgical interventions, i.e., reoperations, revisions, removals, or supplemental fixation associated with either coflex or control group. Refer to FDA guidance for complete definitions (https://www.fda.gov/RegulatoryInformation/Guidances/ucm072263.htm).

  3. Number of Subjects With no Major Device Related Complications

    Time frame: 5 years

    Assessment of major device-related complications at 5 years

  4. Number of Subjects With no Epidural Injection(s)

    Time frame: 5 years

    Assessment of lumbar epidural injections

  5. Number of Subjects With no Persistent New or Increasing Sensory or Motor Deficit

    Time frame: 5 years

    No persistent new or increasing sensory or motor deficit

  6. Number of Subjects With no Persistent New or Increasing Sensory Deficit

    Time frame: 5 years

    No persistent new or increasing sensory deficit

  7. Number of Subjects With no Persistent New or Increasing Motor Deficit

    Time frame: 5 years

    No persistent new or increasing motor deficit

  8. Number of Subjects With no Reoperations or Epidural (Up to Day 1825)

    Time frame: 5 years

    No reoperations, revisions, removals or supplemental fixation and no epidural injection at any lumbar level up to and including the Month 60 visit.

Secondary outcomes

  1. Number of Subjects With a Decrease in Zurich Claudication Questionnaire (ZCQ) Symptom Severity of at Least 0.5 Points

    Time frame: 5 years

    ZCQ is a scale that measures physical function, symptom severity, and patient satisfaction for patients with spinal stenosis. Scores range from 1-5 with a higher score indicating worsening disability.

  2. Number of Subjects With Decrease in Zurich Claudication Questionnaire (ZCQ) Physical Function of at Least 0.5 Points

    Time frame: 5 years

    ZCQ is a scale that measures physical function, symptom severity, and patient satisfaction for patients with spinal stenosis.

  3. Number of Subjects With Maintenance or Improvement in SF-12 Physical Function Component

    Time frame: 5 years

    Assessment of the patient's Quality of Life as measured by SF-12. Scores range from 0 to 100, where a zero score indicates the lowest level of health. Success was defined as subjects who maintained or improved from their SF-12 score at baseline.

  4. Number of Subjects With Maintenance or Improvement in SF-12 Mental Health Component

    Time frame: 5 years

    Assessment of the patient's Quality of Life as measured by SF-12. Scores range from 0 to 100, where a zero score indicates the lowest level of health. Success was defined as subjects who maintained or improved from their SF-12 score at baseline.

  5. Number of Subjects With a Decrease in VAS Back Pain of at Least 20mm

    Time frame: 5 years

    Improvement of the Visual Analog Scale (VAS) for low back pain (on the 100 mm scale) compared to control group. On a scale of 0 to 100, 0 indicates no pain and 100 indicates worst pain imaginable.

  6. Number of Subjects With Decrease VAS Worse Leg Pain of at Least 20mm

    Time frame: 5 years

    Improvement of the Visual Analog Scale (VAS) for leg pain (on the 100 mm scale) compared to control group. On a scale of 0 to 100, 0 indicates no pain and 100 indicates worst pain imaginable.

  7. Mean Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) Score

    Time frame: 5 years

    Assessment of disability from low back pain as measured by ODI (Oswestry Disability Index) mean score in each treatment group at 5 years. On a scale of 0-100, a higher score represents increased disability.

  8. Mean Visual Analog Scale Back Pain Score

    Time frame: 5 years

    Assessment of Back Pain as measured by VAS mean score in each treatment group at 5 years. On a scale of 0-100mm, a higher score represents worse pain.

  9. Mean Visual Analog Scale Leg (Worse) Pain Score

    Time frame: 5 years

    Assessment of Worse Leg Pain by VAS mean score in each treatment group at 5 years. On a scale of 0-100mm, a higher score represents worse pain.

  10. Mean Visual Analog Scale (VAS) Leg (Right) Pain Score

    Time frame: 5 years

    Assessment of Right Leg Pain by VAS mean score in each treatment group at 5 years. On a scale of 0-100mm, a higher score represents worse pain.

  11. Mean Visual Analog Scale (VAS) Leg (Left) Pain Score

    Time frame: 5 years

    Assessment of Left Leg Pain by VAS mean score in both treatment groups at 5 years. On a scale of 0-100mm, a higher score represents worse pain.

  12. Number of Subjects With a Decrease in VAS Right Leg Pain of at Least 20mm

    Time frame: 5 years

    Improvement of the Visual Analog Scale (VAS) for low back pain (on the 100 mm scale) compared to control group. On a scale of 0 to 100, 0 indicates no pain and 100 indicates worst pain imaginable.

  13. Number of Subjects With a Decrease in VAS Left Leg Pain of at Least 20mm

    Time frame: 5 years

    Improvement of the Visual Analog Scale (VAS) for low back pain (on the 100 mm scale) compared to control group. On a scale of 0 to 100, 0 indicates no pain and 100 indicates worst pain imaginable.

  14. Mean Zurich Claudication Questionnaire (ZCQ) Symptom Severity Score

    Time frame: 5 years

    Assessment of symptom severity by ZCQ mean score in both treatment groups at 5 years. ZCQ is a scale that measures physical function, symptom severity, and patient satisfaction for patients with spinal stenosis. Scores range from 1-5 with a higher score indicating worsening disability.

  15. Mean Zurich Claudication Questionnaire (ZCQ) Physical Function Score

    Time frame: 5 years

    Assessment of physical function by ZCQ mean score in both groups at 5 years. ZCQ is a scale that measures physical function, symptom severity, and patient satisfaction for patients with spinal stenosis. Scores range from 1-5 with a higher score indicating worsening disability.

  16. Mean Short Form-12 Physical Component Score

    Time frame: 5 years

    Assessment of the patient's Quality of Life as measured by SF-12 mean score in both treatment groups at 5 years. Scores range from 0 to 100, where a zero score indicates the lowest level of health.

  17. Mean Short Form-12 Mental Component Score

    Time frame: 5 years

    Assessment of the patient's Quality of Life as measured by SF-12 mean score in both treatment groups at 5 years. Scores range from 0 to 100, where a zero score indicates the lowest level of health.

  18. Patient Survey: Satisfaction

    Time frame: 5 years

    Subjects who responded "Very Satisfied" or "Somewhat Satisfied".

  19. Patient Survey: Recommendation of Treatment

    Time frame: 5 years

    Subjects who responded "Definitely Yes" or "Probably Yes"

  20. Pain Management: Class II Narcotics Usage by Device Group

    Time frame: 5 years

    Number of subjects using Class II narcotics

  21. Pain Management: NSAIDs/ASA/Acetaminophen Usage by Device Group

    Time frame: 5 years

    Number of subjects using NSAIDs/ASA/Acetaminophen

Other outcomes

  1. Mean Rotation (F to E) in Degrees - At Level(s) of Implant

    Time frame: 5 years

    As determined by independent radiographic lab, this is the average measure of rotation (flexion to extension) at the index level(s) in both treatment groups at 5 years.

  2. Rotation (F to E) in Degrees - Below Level of Implant

    Time frame: 5 years

    As determined by independent radiographic lab, this is the average measure of rotation (flexion to extension) at the level below the implant in both treatment groups at 5 years.

  3. Rotation (F to E) in Degrees - Above Level of Implant

    Time frame: 5 years

    As determined by independent radiographic lab, this is the average measure of rotation (flexion to extension) at the level above the implant in both treatment groups at 5 years.

  4. Translation (mm) - At Level(s) of Implant

    Time frame: 5 years

    As determined by independent radiographic lab, this is the average measure of translation at the index level(s) in both treatment groups at 5 years.

  5. Translation (mm) - Below Level of Implant

    Time frame: 5 years

    As determined by independent radiographic lab, this is the average measure of translation at the level below the implant in both treatment groups at 5 years.

  6. Translation (mm) - Above Level of Implant

    Time frame: 5 years

    As determined by independent radiographic lab, this is the average measure of translation at the level above the implant in both treatment groups at 5 years.

  7. Anterior Disc Height (mm) - At Level(s) of Implant

    Time frame: 5 years

    As determined by independent radiographic lab, this is the average measure of anterior disc height at the index level(s) in both treatment groups at 5 years.

  8. Posterior Disc Height (mm) - At Level(s) of Implant

    Time frame: 5 years

    As determined by independent radiographic lab, this is the average measure of posterior disc height at the index level(s) in both treatment groups at 5 years.

  9. Translation (F to E) in Percent (%) - At Level(s) of Implant

    Time frame: 5 years

    As determined by independent radiographic lab, this is the percentage of translation at the index level(s) in both treatment groups at 5 years.

  10. Translation (F to E) in Percent (%) - Below Level of Implant

    Time frame: 5 years

    As determined by independent radiographic lab, this is the percentage of translation at the level below the implant in both treatment groups at 5 years.

  11. Translation (F to E) in Percent (%) - Above Level of Implant

    Time frame: 5 years

    As determined by independent radiographic lab, this is the percentage of translation at the level above the implant in both treatment groups at 5 years.

  12. Average Disc Height (mm) - At Level(s) of Implant

    Time frame: 5 years

    As determined by independent radiographic lab, this is the average measure of disc height at the index level(s) in both treatment groups at 5 years.

  13. Change From Pre-Op Anterior Disc Height (mm) - At Level(s) of Implant

    Time frame: 5 years

    As determined by independent radiographic lab, this is the average change from baseline for anterior disc height at the index level(s) in both treatment groups at 5 years.

  14. Change From Pre-Op Posterior Disc Height (mm) - At Level(s) of Implant

    Time frame: 5 years

    As determined by independent radiographic lab, this is the average change from baseline for posterior disc height at the index level(s) in both treatment groups at 5 years.

  15. Change From Pre-Op Average Disc Height (mm) - At Level(s) of Implant

    Time frame: 5 years

    As determined by independent radiographic lab, this is the average change from baseline for disc height at the index level(s) in both treatment groups at 5 years.

  16. Change From Post-Op Anterior Disc Height (mm) - At Level(s) of Implant

    Time frame: 5 years

    As determined by independent radiographic lab, this is the average change from immediate post-op for anterior disc height at the index level(s) in both treatment groups at 5 years.

  17. Change From Post-Op Posterior Disc Height (mm) - At Level(s) of Implant

    Time frame: 5 years

    As determined by independent radiographic lab, this is the average change from immediate post-op for posterior disc height at the index level(s) in both treatment groups at 5 years.

  18. Change From Post-Op Average Disc Height (mm) - At Level(s) of Implant

    Time frame: 5 years

    As determined by independent radiographic lab, this is the average change from immediate post-op for disc height at the index level(s) in both treatment groups at 5 years.

  19. Disc Angle in Degrees - At Level(s) of Implant

    Time frame: 5 years

    As determined by independent radiographic lab, this is the mean disc angle at the index level(s) in both treatment groups at 5 years.

  20. Change From Pre-Op Disc Angle in Degrees - At Level(s) of Implant

    Time frame: 5 years

    As determined by independent radiographic lab, this is the mean change in disc angle from baseline at the index level(s) in both treatment groups at 5 years.

  21. Change From Post-Op Disc Angle in Degrees - At Level(s) of Implant

    Time frame: 5 years

    As determined by independent radiographic lab, this is the mean change in disc angle from immediate post-op at the index level(s) in both treatment groups at 5 years.

  22. Change From Post-Op Spondylolisthesis (mm) - At Level(s) of Implant

    Time frame: 5 years

    As determined by independent radiographic lab, this is the measure of spondylolisthesis at the index level(s) in both treatment groups at 5 years.

  23. Change From Post-Op Spondylolisthesis (%) - At Level(s) of Implant

    Time frame: 5 years

    As determined by independent radiographic lab, this is the measure of the percentage of spondylolisthesis at the index level(s) in both treatment groups at 5 years.

  24. Change From Pre-Op Spondylolisthesis (mm) - At Level(s) of Implant

    Time frame: 5 years

    As determined by independent radiographic lab, this is the mean change in measure of spondylolisthesis at the index level(s) in both treatment groups at 5 years.

  25. Change From Post-Op Spondylolisthesis (mm) - At Level(s) of Implant

    Time frame: 5 years

    As determined by independent radiographic lab, this is the mean change in measure of spondylolisthesis from immediate post-op at the index level(s) in both treatment groups at 5 years.

  26. Foraminal Height (X-ray) (mm) - At Level(s) of Implant

    Time frame: 5 years

    This is the mean foraminal height via x-ray at the index level(s) in both treatment groups at 5 years.

  27. Change From Pre-Op Foraminal Height (X-ray) (mm) - At Level(s) of Implant

    Time frame: 5 years

    This is the mean change in foraminal height via x-ray from baseline at the index level(s) in both treatment groups at 5 years.

  28. Change From Post-Op Foraminal Height (X-ray) (mm) - At Level(s) of Implant

    Time frame: 5 years

    This is the mean change in foraminal height via x-ray from immediate post-op at the index level(s) in both treatment groups at 5 years.

  29. Bony Bridging

    Time frame: 5 years

    Bridging through the posterolateral gutters, between the facet joints, between transverse processes, and/or between facet joint and transverse process will all be considered acceptable forms of bridging bone.

  30. Heterotopic Ossification

    Time frame: 5 years

    Assessment applicable to coflex arm only. The assessment applies to bony formations that occur in and around the implant.

  31. Fusion Status

    Time frame: 5 years

    The assessment is an analysis of three component factors: Bridging Bone, Angular Motion and Translational Motion.

  32. Interface Remodeling - At Level(s) of Implant

    Time frame: 5 years

    Per level; Assessment applicable to coflex arm only. This is an assessment of the bone-implant interface.

  33. Device Condition (Coflex Arm)

    Time frame: 5 years

    Per level; Assessment only applicable to coflex group. Device Condition in the investigational subjects was graded as: Intact, Deformed, Fractured, Migrated, or Dislodged.

  34. Device Condition (Fusion Control)

    Time frame: 5 years

    Per level; This assessment is applicable to the fusion arm only. Device Condition in the control subjects will be graded as: Intact, Loose Screws, or Failed Hardware.

  35. Device Mobility

    Time frame: 5 years

    Per level; Assessment is applicable to coflex arm only. Device Mobility is an expected occurrence in some subjects and represents the amount of the of lift-off of the implant from the inferior spinous process.

Sponsors and collaborators

Lead sponsor

Paradigm Spine

Industry

Collaborators

  • MCRA

Registry information

Official study title

Post-Approval Study to Investigate The Long Term (5-Year) Survivorship of Coflex Compared to Control Fusion Study Patients

Important dates

Study start
2012
Primary completion
2015
Study completion
2015
First posted
Sep 24, 2007
Registry last updated
Feb 6, 2020

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.