SODA: Study Of Disc Anaesthesia For The Preoperative Diagnosis Of Chronic Lower Back Pain

Sponsor
Medtronic Spine LLC (Industry)
Overall Status
Completed
CT.gov ID
NCT00443781
Collaborator
(none)
62
10
1
27
6.2
0.2

Study Details

Study Description

Brief Summary

The primary objective of this study is to document and compare diagnostic test results and procedure safety in subjects undergoing both Functional Anaesthetic DiscographyTM (F.A.D.) and provocative discography (PD) and determine the appropriateness of the F.A.D. procedure data collection script for use in a larger clinical trial.

Condition or Disease Intervention/Treatment Phase
  • Procedure: functional anesthetic discography
  • Procedure: provocative discography
Phase 4

Study Design

Study Type:
Interventional
Actual Enrollment :
62 participants
Allocation:
N/A
Intervention Model:
Single Group Assignment
Masking:
None (Open Label)
Primary Purpose:
Diagnostic
Official Title:
Study Of Disc Anaesthesia For The Preoperative Diagnosis Of Chronic Lower Back Pain
Study Start Date :
Mar 1, 2007
Actual Primary Completion Date :
Jun 1, 2009
Actual Study Completion Date :
Jun 1, 2009

Arms and Interventions

Arm Intervention/Treatment
Other: PD and F.A.D. diagnostic testing

Procedure: functional anesthetic discography
Functional Anesthetic Discography (F.A.D.) involves the placement and anchoring of a small catheter into a disc. After placement, functional testing is performed, in which the subject elicits his/her back pain via functional maneuvers or postures. Local anaesthetic is then delivered into the target disc through the catheter and the effect on functional back pain is noted.

Procedure: provocative discography
Provocative discography (PD) has been used as a preoperative diagnostic tool for patients with back pain attributed to degenerative disc disease considering lumbar disc surgery. During PD, a clinically suspected disc is accessed with a needle and injected under pressure with radiopaque contrast dye. The subject rates his/her experience of pain for intensity and whether the pain is exactly the same as ("concordant") or different from ("not concordant" or "discordant") typical back pain.

Outcome Measures

Primary Outcome Measures

  1. Difference in Number of Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI)-Positive Discs Diagnosed Positive by Provocative Discography (PD) and Functional Anesthetic Discography (F.A.D.) [Approximately 2 hours per subject]

    For provocative discography (PD), a positive response at an individual disc requires all of the following findings: pain intensity (>=7/10 on 0-10 Numerical Rating Scale, NRS) as rated by subjects on injecting contrast into a disc; concordancy (pain reproduces typical back pain exactly). For Functional Anesthetic Discography (F.A.D.), a positive test at an individual disc level is defined as improvement in self-rated pain of >=2 Numerical Rating Scale (NRS) points AND >33% on 0-10 Numerical Rating Scale 10 minutes after injection of lidocaine.

Eligibility Criteria

Criteria

Ages Eligible for Study:
21 Years and Older
Sexes Eligible for Study:
All
Accepts Healthy Volunteers:
No
Inclusion Criteria:
  • Age > 21.

  • Chronic axial low back pain without radicular pain for > six months, not responding to at least three months of non-surgical management under the direction of a physician.

  • One or two discs at L5/S1, L4/L5 or L3/L4 with abnormal findings by MRI, including any of the following: loss of disc hydration, loss of disc height, high intensity zone (HIZ), Modic changes at adjacent vertebral endplates, or herniation without nerve root compression.

  • Subject states that he/she is willing to undergo lumbar spinal fusion, disc replacement, or other definitive treatment if eventual diagnosis supports such treatment.

  • Physician believes that discography is clinically indicated for the purpose of surgical decision-making for the subject.

  • Pre-treatment low back pain by numerical rating scale (NRS) score > 4 (measured as average in last 24 hours on a 0-10 scale).

  • Pre-treatment Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) > 40 (0 - 100 scale).

  • Subject states availability for all study visits.

  • Subject is able to understand the risks and benefits of participating in the study and provides written informed consent.

Exclusion Criteria:
  • Known osteoporosis or osteopenia, metabolic bone disorder, or history of chronic steroid use (the equivalent of 7.5 milligrams of daily prednisone use for > 6 months).

  • Suspected painful disc degeneration (based on clinical examination and MRI findings) outside of L5/S1, L4/L5 or L3/L4 levels.

  • MRI shows disc abnormalities (listed in Inclusion Criteria #3) at all 3 lower lumbar discs (L3/L4, L4/L5 and L5/S1).

  • Abnormal neurologic exam attributable to lumbar disc disease, herniation, or lumbar stenosis.

  • Back, buttock or pelvic pain suspected to be due to spinal stenosis, spinal fractures, infection, cancer, facet arthropathy or other hip or pelvis pathology.

  • Schmorl's node or endplate disruption evident on MRI at L5/S1, L4/L5, or L3/L4.

  • Medical history, physical examination or radiographic evidence (e.g., disc height too narrow) to suggest that either PD or F.A.D. may not be technically feasible.

  • Any previous lumbar spine fusion or disc replacement.

  • More than grade 1 spondylolisthesis as assessed by x-ray or MRI.

  • Significant clinical comorbidity that may potentially interfere with data collection or follow-up (e.g., dementia, severe comorbid illness).

  • History of major depression, psychosis or somatization disorder, or panic disorder.

  • Allergy to any materials used in PD or F.A.D. devices, contrast, lidocaine, or bupivacaine.

  • Any evidence of disc or systemic infection.

  • Pregnant or child-bearing potential and not currently on adequate birth control method.

Contacts and Locations

Locations

Site City State Country Postal Code
1 The Spine and Neurosurgery Center Huntsville Alabama United States 35801
2 Spine Source Beverly Hills California United States 90212
3 Pacific Spine Clinic Escondido California United States 92025
4 UCSD Orthopaedic Surgery San Diego California United States 92103
5 Emory Orthopaedics & Spine Center Atlanta Georgia United States 30329
6 Hanover Orthopaedic Associates, Inc. Hanover Pennsylvania United States 17331
7 Texas Back Institute Plano Texas United States 75093
8 East Texas Medical Center Tyler Texas United States 75701
9 Evergreen Surgical Center Kirkland Washington United States 98034
10 Milwaukee Neurological Institute Milwaukee Wisconsin United States 53233

Sponsors and Collaborators

  • Medtronic Spine LLC

Investigators

  • Principal Investigator: Ray M Baker, MD, University of Washington
  • Principal Investigator: Rick D Guyer, MD, Texas Back Institute, Plano, TX

Study Documents (Full-Text)

None provided.

More Information

Publications

None provided.
Responsible Party:
Medtronic Spine LLC
ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier:
NCT00443781
Other Study ID Numbers:
  • SP0603
First Posted:
Mar 6, 2007
Last Update Posted:
Jan 5, 2021
Last Verified:
Mar 1, 2012
Keywords provided by Medtronic Spine LLC
Additional relevant MeSH terms:

Study Results

Participant Flow

Recruitment Details
Pre-assignment Detail
Arm/Group Title PD and F.A.D. Diagnostic Testing
Arm/Group Description Subjects with chronic axial low back pain with suspected degenerative disc disease underwent provocative discography(PD)followed by Functional Anaesthetic Discography (F.A.D.)as part of a pilot, multicenter, prospective, single-arm diagnostic study.
Period Title: Overall Study
STARTED 62
COMPLETED 37
NOT COMPLETED 25

Baseline Characteristics

Arm/Group Title PD and F.A.D. Diagnostic Testing
Arm/Group Description Subjects with chronic axial low back pain with suspected degenerative disc disease underwent provocative discography(PD)followed by Functional Anaesthetic Discography (F.A.D.)as part of a pilot, multicenter, prospective, single-arm diagnostic study.
Overall Participants 62
Age (Count of Participants)
<=18 years
0
0%
Between 18 and 65 years
61
98.4%
>=65 years
1
1.6%
Age (years) [Mean (Standard Deviation) ]
Mean (Standard Deviation) [years]
40.7
(9.8)
Sex: Female, Male (Count of Participants)
Female
36
58.1%
Male
26
41.9%
Region of Enrollment (participants) [Number]
United States
62
100%

Outcome Measures

1. Primary Outcome
Title Difference in Number of Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI)-Positive Discs Diagnosed Positive by Provocative Discography (PD) and Functional Anesthetic Discography (F.A.D.)
Description For provocative discography (PD), a positive response at an individual disc requires all of the following findings: pain intensity (>=7/10 on 0-10 Numerical Rating Scale, NRS) as rated by subjects on injecting contrast into a disc; concordancy (pain reproduces typical back pain exactly). For Functional Anesthetic Discography (F.A.D.), a positive test at an individual disc level is defined as improvement in self-rated pain of >=2 Numerical Rating Scale (NRS) points AND >33% on 0-10 Numerical Rating Scale 10 minutes after injection of lidocaine.
Time Frame Approximately 2 hours per subject

Outcome Measure Data

Analysis Population Description
Subjects which underwent Provocative Discography (PD) and Functional Anesthetic Discography (F.A.D.) consist of 1 population (N=50). Subjects which underwent either PD, F.A.D. or neither diagnostic test consist of a second population (all subjects enrolled, N=62). This is a diagnostic study. No imputation technique was used.
Arm/Group Title PD and F.A.D. Diagnostic Testing
Arm/Group Description Subjects with chronic axial low back pain with suspected degenerative disc disease underwent provocative discography(PD)followed by Functional Anaesthetic Discography (F.A.D.)as part of a pilot, multicenter, prospective, single-arm diagnostic study.
Measure Participants 50
Measure discs 66
PD - Negative and F.A.D. - Negative
18
PD - Negative and F.A.D. - Positive
7
PD - Positive and F.A.D. - Negative
25
PD - Positive and F.A.D. - Positive
16
Statistical Analysis 1
Statistical Analysis Overview Comparison Group Selection PD and F.A.D. Diagnostic Testing
Comments Mcnemar test was used to test the difference between paired PD (provocative discography) and F.A.D. (Functional Anesthetic Discography) proportions.
Type of Statistical Test Superiority or Other (legacy)
Comments
Statistical Test of Hypothesis p-Value 0.002
Comments
Method McNemar
Comments Exact test was used.

Adverse Events

Time Frame
Adverse Event Reporting Description
Arm/Group Title PD and F.A.D. Diagnostic Testing
Arm/Group Description Subjects with chronic axial low back pain with suspected degenerative disc disease underwent provocative discography(PD)followed by Functional Anaesthetic Discography (F.A.D.)as part of a pilot, multicenter, prospective, single-arm diagnostic study.
All Cause Mortality
PD and F.A.D. Diagnostic Testing
Affected / at Risk (%) # Events
Total / (NaN)
Serious Adverse Events
PD and F.A.D. Diagnostic Testing
Affected / at Risk (%) # Events
Total 1/62 (1.6%)
Musculoskeletal and connective tissue disorders
neck pain 1/62 (1.6%) 1
Other (Not Including Serious) Adverse Events
PD and F.A.D. Diagnostic Testing
Affected / at Risk (%) # Events
Total 10/62 (16.1%)
Gastrointestinal disorders
nausea 2/62 (3.2%) 2
vomiting 2/62 (3.2%) 2
Injury, poisoning and procedural complications
back injury 1/62 (1.6%) 1
procedural pain 1/62 (1.6%) 1
Musculoskeletal and connective tissue disorders
back pain 3/62 (4.8%) 3
groin pain 1/62 (1.6%) 1
muscle spasms 1/62 (1.6%) 1
pain in extremity 2/62 (3.2%) 2
Nervous system disorders
monoparesis 1/62 (1.6%) 1
sciatica 1/62 (1.6%) 1
syncope vasovagal 1/62 (1.6%) 1
Psychiatric disorders
abnormal dreams 1/62 (1.6%) 1

Limitations/Caveats

There were 12 subjects which did not undergo both PD (Provocative Discography) and F.A.D. (Functional Anesthetic Discography) and therefore could not be included in the primary endpoint analysis (analyzable population for primary endpoint = 50/62).

More Information

Certain Agreements

Principal Investigators are NOT employed by the organization sponsoring the study.

No publication, abstract, or presentation shall be submitted unless the multi-center report has been published. If report is not submitted within 24 months after completion, PI can present outcomes from their site. Proposed publications or presentations to be submitted to sponsor for review at least 60 days in advance. If proposed publication or presentation contains subject matter which is deemed to warrant intellectual property protection, sponsor may delay up to an additional 90 days.

Results Point of Contact

Name/Title Clinical Department
Organization Medtronic Spine and Biologics
Phone 1800-876-3133 ext 6068
Email msbkclinicalresearch@medtronic.com
Responsible Party:
Medtronic Spine LLC
ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier:
NCT00443781
Other Study ID Numbers:
  • SP0603
First Posted:
Mar 6, 2007
Last Update Posted:
Jan 5, 2021
Last Verified:
Mar 1, 2012