Clinical Research Directory

Posterior Cervical Fixation Study

The objective of this study is to evaluate the safety and performance of occipito-cervico-thoracic spine surgery using posterior fixation as measured by reported complications, radiographic outcomes, and patients reported outcomes (PROs).This study is being undertaken to identify possible residual risks and to clarify mid-to long-term clinical performance that may affect the benefit/risk ratio of posterior fixation systems.

Long-Term Assessment of the Safety and Performance of the NuVasive Simplify Disc at Two Levels

A prospective, multicenter post-market clinical follow-up study to evaluate the 10-year long-term safety and effectiveness of the Simplify Disc at two levels in subjects who were enrolled in the IDE study (NCT03123549) and/or post approval study (NCT04980378).

Long-term Assessment of the Safety and Performance of the NuVasive Simplify Disc

A prospective, multicenter post-market clinical follow-up study to evaluate the 10-year long-term safety and effectiveness of the Simplify Disc in subjects who were enrolled in the post approval study (NCT04630626).

NuVasive® ACP System Study

The primary objective of this study is to evaluate the safety and performance of anterior cervical spine surgery using the NuVasive anterior cervical plate (ACP) System as measured by reported complications, radiographic outcomes, and patient-reported outcomes (PROs).

A Multi-Center, Prospective Historically Controlled Clinical Trial Comparing the Safety and Effectiveness of Triadyme-C to a Total Disc Replacement Control Cohort in the Treatment of Symptomatic Cervical Disc Disease (SCDD) at a Single Level

A multicenter, prospective, historically controlled study to evaluate the safety and effectiveness of the Triadyme-C device in comparison to other approved TDRs in the treatment of symptomatic cervical disc disease (SCDD) in subjects who are symptomatic at only a single level from C3 to C7 that are unresponsive to conservative management.

A Clinical Registry to Track the Real World Use of the Saber-C® Cervical Fusion Device

The objective of this registry study is to collect radiographic and clinical outcome measures to determine the effectiveness of the Saber-C device.

Predictors of Axial Pain Improvement After Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion

Neck pain is a common, multifactorial condition. In the case of degenerative cervical spinal disease, it can result from changes in the intervertebral discs, muscles, intervertebral joints, or sagittal imbalance. Anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) is a currently widely accepted procedure for treating cervical degenerative spine disease, with a high patient satisfaction rate. In the current state of knowledge, it is not used for treating axial neck pain, but rather in cases of discopathy causing spinal myelopathy or cervical radiculopathy, in which neck pain often coexists or predominates. The current literature provides ample evidence of the significant effect of ACDF in improving axial neck pain in the conditions mentioned previously. However, little information exists on which patients achieve improvement. The aim of this prospective study is to analyze the outcomes of ACDF in patients with neck pain and to identify predictors of reduction in axial neck pain after ACDF.

A Clinical Trial Comparing the BAGUERA C to the Marketed Mobi-C® for the Treatment of Cervical Disc Disease at 2 Contiguous Levels

The proposed investigation is a multi-center, prospective, randomized, controlled comparison of the BAGUERA®C to the control, a similar, legally marketed total disc replacement device in subjects with symptomatic cervical disc disease (SCDD) at two contiguous levels. Subjects will be randomized in a 2:1 ratio to the two-level BAGUERA®C Cervical Disc Prosthesis (investigational group) or to the two-level Mobi-C® Cervical Disc (control group). Subjects enrolled in the study will be evaluated pre-operatively, at the time of surgery, discharge, and at 6 weeks, 3, 6, 12, and 24 months and then annually until 7 years post-surgery.

Cervical Arthroplasty Cost Effectiveness Study (CACES)

To date, no consensus exists on which anterior surgical technique is more cost-effective to treat cervical degenerative disc disease (CDDD). The most commonly used surgical treatment for patients with single- or multilevel symptomatic CDDD is anterior cervical discectomy with fusion (ACDF). However, new complaints of radiculopathy and/or myelopathy commonly develop at adjacent levels, also known as clinical adjacent segment pathology (CASP). It remains unknown to what extent kinematics, surgery-induced fusion and natural history of disease play a role in its development. Anterior cervical discectomy with arthroplasty (ACDA) is thought to reduce the incidence of CASP by preserving motion in the operated segment. ACDA is often discouraged as the implant costs are higher whilst the clinical outcomes are similar to ACDF. However, preventing CASP might be a reason for ACDA to be a more cost-effective technique in the long-term. In this randomized controlled trial patients will be randomized to receive ACDF or ACDA in a 1:1 ratio. Adult patients with single- or multi-level CDDD and symptoms of radiculopathy and/or myelopathy will be included. The primary outcome is cost-effectiveness and cost-utility of both techniques from a societal perspective. Secondary objectives are the differences in clinical and radiological outcomes between the two techniques, as well as the qualitative process surrounding anterior decompression surgery. All outcomes will be measured at baseline and every 6 months till 4 years postoperatively. High quality evidence regarding the cost-effectiveness of both ACDA and ACDF is lacking, to date no prospective trials from a societal perspective exist. Considering the ageing of the population and the rising healthcare costs, the need for a solid clinical cost-effectiveness trial addressing this question is high.