search
Back to results

SLIP II Registry: Spinal Laminectomy Versus Instrumented Pedicle Screw Fusion (SLIP II)

Primary Purpose

Lumbar Spondylolisthesis, Grade 1 Spondylolisthesis, Lumbar Spinal Stenosis

Status
Terminated
Phase
Not Applicable
Locations
International
Study Type
Interventional
Intervention
Expert Panel Review
Sponsored by
Lahey Clinic
About
Eligibility
Locations
Arms
Outcomes
Full info

About this trial

This is an interventional treatment trial for Lumbar Spondylolisthesis focused on measuring Lumbar Spondylolisthesis, Grade 1 Spondylolisthesis, Lumbar Spinal Stenosis, Degenerative Spondylolisthesis

Eligibility Criteria

18 Years - undefined (Adult, Older Adult)All SexesDoes not accept healthy volunteers

Inclusion Criteria:

  • Symptomatic lumbar spinal stenosis: defined as radicular and/or back pain either induced or aggravated by activity and relieved by rest.
  • Single-level grade I degenerative spondylolisthesis (3-14mm)

Exclusion Criteria:

  • Serious medical illness (ASA Class IV or higher)
  • Spondylolysis
  • Multilevel spondylolisthesis or high grade spondylolisthesis (grade II or greater than 14mm)

Sites / Locations

  • Barrow Brain and Spine
  • University of California, San Fransisco
  • University of Miami
  • Carle Neurosciences Institute
  • Goodman Campbell Brain & Spine
  • Norton Leatherman Spine Center
  • Massachusetts General Hospital
  • Lahey Hospital & Medical Center
  • University of Minnesota
  • Mayo Clinic
  • Hospital for Special Surgery
  • Columbia University
  • Cleveland Clinic Foundation
  • University of Pittsburgh
  • University of Utah Hospital
  • University of Wisconsin
  • University Health Network - Toronto Western Hospital

Arms of the Study

Arm 1

Arm 2

Arm Type

Experimental

No Intervention

Arm Label

Expert Panel Review

No Expert Panel Review

Arm Description

For patients who are randomized to receive an expert panel review, de-identified lumbar MRI (sagittal and key axial images), 36-inch standing plain radiographs (if available), and flexion and extension radiographs will be uploaded into a web-based platform and reviewed. These will be submitted for an Expert Panel Review. Images will be reviewed through a Spine Expert's Network, consisting of physicians involved in this study who will each offer their opinion as to which of two surgical treatment groups (decompression alone or decompression with fusion) they would choose for the patient. The results of this review will be discussed between the patient and the patient's physician. Together, they will determine the best surgical approach.

For patients not receiving the expert panel review, they will discuss with their surgeon the best surgical option and proceed as they would in standard of care.

Outcomes

Primary Outcome Measures

NASS Patient Satisfaction
To determine at 1 and 2 years if an expert panel review of individual cases is associated with an 8% difference in the percentage of patients who achieve at least 1) the treatment met expectations or 2) did not improve as much as hoped but would undergo the same treatment for the same outcome.

Secondary Outcome Measures

Oswestry Disability Index (ODI)
To determine at 1 and 2 years if an expert panel review of individual cases is associated with a greater percentage of patients who improve by more than 10 points. In addition, we will compare mean change in ODI score among patients randomized to expert panel review to those randomized to receive no review.
Oswestry Disability Index (ODI)
To compare mean change in ODI score between patients treated with laminectomy alone versus laminectomy with instrumented lumbar fusion
EuroQol-5 Dimensions (EQ-5D)
Quality of life will be assessed through EuroQol 5 Dimensions (EQ-5D) at all time points. The three-level scale denotes no problems, some problems, or extreme problems, across the five domains of mobility, self-care, usual activities, pain/discomfort, and anxiety/depression. A visual analog scale is also used to evaluate overall health state. Comparisons among groups will compare difference in the change scores.
Cost Data -- Hospital Claims & Health Resource Utilization
Costs will also be compared between groups during the duration of the study.
Complications
Complications at time of surgery to 30 days post-operative will be collected.
Return to Work
Working status will be asked at all time points to capture productivity.
Flexion-Extension Radiographs
To determine stability after surgery as well as fusion.
36-inch Standing Plain Radiographs
To assess spine alignment.
Step Count
Step count will also be evaluated against outcomes (ODI and EQ-5D) and re-operations.

Full Information

First Posted
June 12, 2018
Last Updated
October 13, 2023
Sponsor
Lahey Clinic
search

1. Study Identification

Unique Protocol Identification Number
NCT03570801
Brief Title
SLIP II Registry: Spinal Laminectomy Versus Instrumented Pedicle Screw Fusion
Acronym
SLIP II
Official Title
SLIP II Registry: Spinal Laminectomy to Laminectomy With Instrumented Pedicle Screw Fusion for Lumbar Stenosis With Grade I Spondylolisthesis
Study Type
Interventional

2. Study Status

Record Verification Date
July 2022
Overall Recruitment Status
Terminated
Why Stopped
We performed unplanned interim conditional power (CP) analyses for the primary endpoint. We pre-specified futility as CP<20%. Based on 301 patients (38% of target), CP was <20% and the independent steering committee recommended termination.
Study Start Date
October 17, 2017 (Actual)
Primary Completion Date
July 1, 2022 (Actual)
Study Completion Date
July 1, 2022 (Actual)

3. Sponsor/Collaborators

Responsible Party, by Official Title
Sponsor
Name of the Sponsor
Lahey Clinic

4. Oversight

Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated Drug Product
No
Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated Device Product
No
Data Monitoring Committee
No

5. Study Description

Brief Summary
The purpose of the project is to perform an RCT comparing patient satisfaction and outcome with or without the use of an expert panel. The purpose is also to create a registry to compare the effectiveness of decompression alone versus decompression with fusion for patients with degenerative grade I spondylolisthesis and symptomatic lumbar spinal stenosis. Primary analysis will focus on the patients' improvement from baseline patient-reported outcome questionnaires. In addition, the SLIP II registry aims to (i) develop an algorithm which could identify cases in which surgical experts are likely to recommend one treatment (i.e. >80% of experts recommend one form of treatment) and (ii) develop a radiology-based machine learning algorithm that would prospectively classify patients as either 'stable' or 'unstable.' In addition to patient reported outcomes, step counts will be collected in order to determine the correlation of step count with patient-reported outcomes (ODI and EQ-5D) and the need for re-operation. This registry portion of the study aims to prospectively collect comparative data for these patients treated with either decompression alone or decompression with fusion.
Detailed Description
Aim: To conduct a randomized control trial comparing patient outcomes and satisfaction with or without expert panel review before making a final decision about surgery for grade I degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis. A prospective, multi-center registry aimed at addressing important issues pertaining to outcomes from treatment for degenerative spondylolisthesis and spinal stenosis will also be generated. Background: Surgery may be offered to patients with symptomatic lumbar stenosis with degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis who fail nonoperative treatment measures including physical therapy and epidural steroid injections. For patients with lumbar stenosis without spondylolisthesis, a decompression alone is typical, while those patients who do have degenerative spondylolisthesis and who also have significant mechanical back pain may be offered lumbar decompression with or without fusion. These guidelines were written based upon the SPORT study, which provided the highest quality of evidence available at the time. Additional studies have show that costly interventions such as lumbar fusion may ultimately be cost-effective if they provide durable clinical benefit. Two recent publications in The New England Journal of Medicine present new evidence with conflicting results on superficial review. The Spinal Laminectomy versus Instrumented Pedicle Screw (SLIP) trial provides level I evidence for the efficacy of fusion to improve clinical outcomes and lower reoperation rates compared to a standard laminectomy and medial facetectomy over a four year time frame in patients with neurogenic claudication associated with stable single level spondylolisthesis. Conversely, the Swedish study provides level II evidence that the addition of a variety of fusion techniques does not have significant benefit in the first two years following operation compared to a variety of decompression techniques in a heterogeneous population of patients with stenosis associated with spondylolisthesis. The patient populations treated, surgical techniques used, and outcome measures assessed differed between the two studies and when taken together, underline the need to new comparative effectiveness data for patients with this problem. Additionally, one key challenge surgeons face is whether or not to recommend a spinal fusion. Spinal fusion is expensive, assoicated with greater costs and complications, but it appears to be necessary in at least 30% of patients.3 Preliminary data suggests that when when greater than 80% of an expert panel votes for one treatment opition, either a fusion or decompression alone, and when a patient's actual treatment aligns with the expert panel recommention, the patient-reported outcomes are greater than when the surgical approach is not aligned with the expert panel.10 This data highlights an interest in developing articifical intelligence (AI) that may be able to aid in both identification and predictive tasks. Any progress in this realm would be enormously powerful from a clinical standpoint and would likely result in more efficient use of surgical appraoches and in turn, healthcare spending. All images that are captured in the registry will be used to train convolutional neural networks (CNN). These are mathematical operations which extract patterns from image data and generalize it across many images fed into the dataset. They primarily use calculations to extract patterns which are stored as a model which will be a collection of numbers. The images stored in this registry will be used to develop algorithms to assess cases in which an expert panel is more likely to suggest one treatment over the other as well as develop an algorithm that would prospectively classify patients as either 'stable' or 'unstable.' Plan: Before making a decision regarding which specific operation should be performed in each case, each patient will be randomized to receive an expert panel review or to not receive an expert panel review. For patients who receive an expert panel review, the patients' de-identified lumbar MRI (sagittal and key axial images), 36-inch standing plain radiographs (if available), and flexion and extension radiographs will be uploaded into a web-based platform and reviewed with plans to share the reviews with patients and their treating physicians in real time. For patients who are randomized to no expert panel review, they will discuss with their surgeon the best surgical option for them and proceed as they would in standard of care. Patients with symptomatic lumbar spinal stenosis and single level degenerative grade I spondylolisthesis will be treated either with decompression or decompression with fusion. Symptomatic spinal stenosis will be defined as radicular and/or back pain either induced by or aggravated by activity and relieved by rest in a patient with either moderately severe or severe lumbar spinal stenosis. Patient-reported outcomes will be captured at baseline, at 3 and 6 months, and annually out to five years. The imaging data will be used to create artificial intelligence (AI) algorithms that will help assess when an expert panel is more likely to suggest one treatment over the other as well as develop an algorithm that would prospectively classify patients as either 'stable' or 'unstable.' Ultimately long term follow-up will help confirm whether a case was correctly assessed as stable or unstable. A patient would be confirmed as unstable, if they underwent decompression alone and then required a re-operation to stabilize the spine at the level of spondylolisthesis within 5 years of the initial operation. In a similar way, a patient would be confirmed as stable, if no re-operation were necessary over the 5-year study follow-up period. Select sites will participate in an assessment of the utilization of step count as an outcome. Average step count will be captured pre-operatively as well as at 3- and 6-months and annually out to 5 years. The mean step count at each time point will be compared to the mean change scores for ODI and EQ-5D. Additionally, average step counts overtime will be analyzed for those patients who undergo a re-operation. Interim Analysis: An interim analysis is planned when 150 patients have reached eligibility at 6 month follow-up. Patients' change from baseline patient-reported outcome questionnaires will be assessed.

6. Conditions and Keywords

Primary Disease or Condition Being Studied in the Trial, or the Focus of the Study
Lumbar Spondylolisthesis, Grade 1 Spondylolisthesis, Lumbar Spinal Stenosis, Degenerative Spondylolisthesis
Keywords
Lumbar Spondylolisthesis, Grade 1 Spondylolisthesis, Lumbar Spinal Stenosis, Degenerative Spondylolisthesis

7. Study Design

Primary Purpose
Treatment
Study Phase
Not Applicable
Interventional Study Model
Parallel Assignment
Model Description
Randomized Control Trial with randomization ratio 1:1
Masking
None (Open Label)
Allocation
Randomized
Enrollment
662 (Actual)

8. Arms, Groups, and Interventions

Arm Title
Expert Panel Review
Arm Type
Experimental
Arm Description
For patients who are randomized to receive an expert panel review, de-identified lumbar MRI (sagittal and key axial images), 36-inch standing plain radiographs (if available), and flexion and extension radiographs will be uploaded into a web-based platform and reviewed. These will be submitted for an Expert Panel Review. Images will be reviewed through a Spine Expert's Network, consisting of physicians involved in this study who will each offer their opinion as to which of two surgical treatment groups (decompression alone or decompression with fusion) they would choose for the patient. The results of this review will be discussed between the patient and the patient's physician. Together, they will determine the best surgical approach.
Arm Title
No Expert Panel Review
Arm Type
No Intervention
Arm Description
For patients not receiving the expert panel review, they will discuss with their surgeon the best surgical option and proceed as they would in standard of care.
Intervention Type
Other
Intervention Name(s)
Expert Panel Review
Intervention Description
There is some preliminary evidence suggesting that having a group of spinal experts review x-rays prior to treatment might provide useful information to the patient and the patients' treating physician when trying to make a decision about what type of surgery to perform.
Primary Outcome Measure Information:
Title
NASS Patient Satisfaction
Description
To determine at 1 and 2 years if an expert panel review of individual cases is associated with an 8% difference in the percentage of patients who achieve at least 1) the treatment met expectations or 2) did not improve as much as hoped but would undergo the same treatment for the same outcome.
Time Frame
1 year, 2 years, 3 years, 4 years, 5 years
Secondary Outcome Measure Information:
Title
Oswestry Disability Index (ODI)
Description
To determine at 1 and 2 years if an expert panel review of individual cases is associated with a greater percentage of patients who improve by more than 10 points. In addition, we will compare mean change in ODI score among patients randomized to expert panel review to those randomized to receive no review.
Time Frame
Baseline, 3 months, 6 months, 1 year, 2 years, 3 years, 4 years, 5 years
Title
Oswestry Disability Index (ODI)
Description
To compare mean change in ODI score between patients treated with laminectomy alone versus laminectomy with instrumented lumbar fusion
Time Frame
Baseline, 3 months, 6 months, 1 year, 2 years, 3 years, 4 years, 5 years
Title
EuroQol-5 Dimensions (EQ-5D)
Description
Quality of life will be assessed through EuroQol 5 Dimensions (EQ-5D) at all time points. The three-level scale denotes no problems, some problems, or extreme problems, across the five domains of mobility, self-care, usual activities, pain/discomfort, and anxiety/depression. A visual analog scale is also used to evaluate overall health state. Comparisons among groups will compare difference in the change scores.
Time Frame
Baseline, 3 months, 6 months, 1 year, 2 years, 3 years, 4 years, 5 years
Title
Cost Data -- Hospital Claims & Health Resource Utilization
Description
Costs will also be compared between groups during the duration of the study.
Time Frame
3 months, 6 months, 1 year, 2 years, 3 years, 4 years, 5 years
Title
Complications
Description
Complications at time of surgery to 30 days post-operative will be collected.
Time Frame
1 month
Title
Return to Work
Description
Working status will be asked at all time points to capture productivity.
Time Frame
Baseline, 3 months, 6 months, 1 year, 2 years, 3 years, 4 years, 5 years
Title
Flexion-Extension Radiographs
Description
To determine stability after surgery as well as fusion.
Time Frame
Baseline, 1 year, 2 years
Title
36-inch Standing Plain Radiographs
Description
To assess spine alignment.
Time Frame
Baseline, 1 year
Title
Step Count
Description
Step count will also be evaluated against outcomes (ODI and EQ-5D) and re-operations.
Time Frame
Baseline, 3 months, 6 months, 1 year, 2 years, 3 years, 4 years, 5 years

10. Eligibility

Sex
All
Minimum Age & Unit of Time
18 Years
Accepts Healthy Volunteers
No
Eligibility Criteria
Inclusion Criteria: Symptomatic lumbar spinal stenosis: defined as radicular and/or back pain either induced or aggravated by activity and relieved by rest. Single-level grade I degenerative spondylolisthesis (3-14mm) Exclusion Criteria: Serious medical illness (ASA Class IV or higher) Spondylolysis Multilevel spondylolisthesis or high grade spondylolisthesis (grade II or greater than 14mm)
Overall Study Officials:
First Name & Middle Initial & Last Name & Degree
Zoher Ghogawala, MD
Organizational Affiliation
Lahey Hospital & Medical Center
Official's Role
Principal Investigator
Facility Information:
Facility Name
Barrow Brain and Spine
City
Scottsdale
State/Province
Arizona
ZIP/Postal Code
85251
Country
United States
Facility Name
University of California, San Fransisco
City
San Francisco
State/Province
California
ZIP/Postal Code
94143
Country
United States
Facility Name
University of Miami
City
Miami
State/Province
Florida
ZIP/Postal Code
33125
Country
United States
Facility Name
Carle Neurosciences Institute
City
Urbana
State/Province
Illinois
ZIP/Postal Code
61801
Country
United States
Facility Name
Goodman Campbell Brain & Spine
City
Carmel
State/Province
Indiana
ZIP/Postal Code
46032
Country
United States
Facility Name
Norton Leatherman Spine Center
City
Louisville
State/Province
Kentucky
ZIP/Postal Code
40202
Country
United States
Facility Name
Massachusetts General Hospital
City
Boston
State/Province
Massachusetts
ZIP/Postal Code
02114
Country
United States
Facility Name
Lahey Hospital & Medical Center
City
Burlington
State/Province
Massachusetts
ZIP/Postal Code
01803
Country
United States
Facility Name
University of Minnesota
City
Minneapolis
State/Province
Minnesota
ZIP/Postal Code
55455
Country
United States
Facility Name
Mayo Clinic
City
Rochester
State/Province
Minnesota
ZIP/Postal Code
55902
Country
United States
Facility Name
Hospital for Special Surgery
City
New York
State/Province
New York
ZIP/Postal Code
10021
Country
United States
Facility Name
Columbia University
City
New York
State/Province
New York
ZIP/Postal Code
10027
Country
United States
Facility Name
Cleveland Clinic Foundation
City
Cleveland
State/Province
Ohio
ZIP/Postal Code
44195
Country
United States
Facility Name
University of Pittsburgh
City
Pittsburgh
State/Province
Pennsylvania
ZIP/Postal Code
15213
Country
United States
Facility Name
University of Utah Hospital
City
Salt Lake City
State/Province
Utah
ZIP/Postal Code
84132
Country
United States
Facility Name
University of Wisconsin
City
Madison
State/Province
Wisconsin
ZIP/Postal Code
53792
Country
United States
Facility Name
University Health Network - Toronto Western Hospital
City
Toronto
State/Province
Ontario
ZIP/Postal Code
M5T 2S8
Country
Canada

12. IPD Sharing Statement

Plan to Share IPD
Yes
IPD Sharing Plan Description
Deidentified data would be shared with other researchers after primary analysis has been published.
IPD Sharing Time Frame
After primary analysis has been published for up to 5 years.

Learn more about this trial

SLIP II Registry: Spinal Laminectomy Versus Instrumented Pedicle Screw Fusion

We'll reach out to this number within 24 hrs