Study Stopped
Product no longer on the market
Radiographic Analysis Using PureGen Versus Autologous Bone in Posterolateral Fusion (PLF)
A Radiographic Analysis Using PureGen Osteoprogenitor Cell Allograft Versus Autologous Bone in Posterolateral Fusion in a Side-by-Side Comparison in the Same Patient (PLF)
1 other identifier
interventional
1
1 country
1
Brief Summary
The purpose of this study is to evaluate the rate and quality of fusion of PureGen Osteoprogenitor Cell Allograft, compared to autograft bone in instrumented posterolateral fusion (PLF) procedures.
Trial Health
Trial Health Score
Automated assessment based on enrollment pace, timeline, and geographic reach
participants targeted
Target at below P25 for not_applicable
Started Feb 2011
Typical duration for not_applicable
1 active site
Health score is calculated from publicly available data and should be used for screening purposes only.
Trial Relationships
Click on a node to explore related trials.
Study Timeline
Key milestones and dates
Study Start
First participant enrolled
February 1, 2011
CompletedFirst Submitted
Initial submission to the registry
February 9, 2011
CompletedFirst Posted
Study publicly available on registry
February 11, 2011
CompletedPrimary Completion
Last participant's last visit for primary outcome
November 1, 2013
CompletedStudy Completion
Last participant's last visit for all outcomes
November 1, 2013
CompletedResults Posted
Study results publicly available
October 5, 2022
CompletedNovember 2, 2022
September 1, 2022
2.8 years
February 9, 2011
September 8, 2022
October 5, 2022
Conditions
Outcome Measures
Primary Outcomes (1)
Number of Patients With Fusion
Number of patients with fusion at the 6- and conditional 12- and 24-month visit
6, 12 and 24 month
Study Arms (2)
Study Graft Composite
EXPERIMENTALAlphaGraft ProFuse Demineralized Bone Scaffold are soaked in PureGen according to Preparation for Use and handling technique. The graft composite is placed on the randomized study side contralateral to the autograft bone graft per surgeon's standard technique for PLF. The wound is closed according to surgeon's standard technique. Post operative care will be according to the site specific standard of care. An avoidance of heavy physical activity and limitations on working, lifting, bending etc. are common precautions post procedure. The decision to use a post operative orthosis is left to the discretion of the Investigator.
Control Graft Composite
ACTIVE COMPARATORContralateral to the study graft composite, placement of posterolateral fusion graft composite containing iliac crest bone (5 cc/level/side) and local autograft composite (equal volume split with study side). Supplemental posterior pedicle screw fixation utilizing Zodiac, Illico or Xenon Spinal Fixation system. * A defined volume of iliac crest bone graft (indicated in table 2) is harvested and combined with 50% of the previously harvest morselized local bone * The graft composite is placed on the randomized control side using standard technique for PLF
Interventions
PureGen Osteoprogenitor Cell Allograft with posterior transpedicular fixation.
Eligibility Criteria
You may qualify if:
- Symptomatic lumbar degenerative disc disease in up to two contiguous levels between L1 and S1
- Subjects with back and/or leg pain indicated for posterior stabilization with or without decompression at any level and posterolateral fusion (PLF)
- Unresponsive to conservative treatment for at least 6 months
- Radiographic evidence of primary diagnosis
You may not qualify if:
- More than 2 levels requiring posterolateral fusion
- Spondylolisthesis greater than Grade I
- Prior failed fusion surgery at any lumbar level(s)
- Systemic or local infection in the disc or cervical spine, past or present
- Active systemic disease
- Osteoporosis, osteomalacia, or other metabolic bone disease that would significantly inhibit bone healing
- Use of other bone graft, Bone Morphogenetic Protein (BMP) or bone graft substitutes in addition to or in place of those products specified
- BMI greater than 40
- Use of post operative Spinal Cord Stimulator (SCS)
- Known or suspected history of alcohol and/or drug abuse
- Involved in pending litigation or worker's compensation related to the spine
- Pregnant or planning to become pregnant during the course of the study
- Insulin-dependent diabetes mellitus
- Life expectancy less than duration of study
- Any significant psychological disturbance that could impair consent process or ability to complete self-assessment questionnaires
- +2 more criteria
Contact the study team to confirm eligibility.
Sponsors & Collaborators
Study Sites (1)
Unknown Facility
Beverly Hills, California, United States
MeSH Terms
Conditions
Condition Hierarchy (Ancestors)
Results Point of Contact
- Title
- Saba Pasha, Director Clinical Research & Data Science
- Organization
- ATEC Spine
Publication Agreements
- PI is Sponsor Employee
- No
- Restrictive Agreement
- No
Study Design
- Study Type
- interventional
- Phase
- not applicable
- Allocation
- RANDOMIZED
- Masking
- NONE
- Purpose
- TREATMENT
- Intervention Model
- PARALLEL
- Sponsor Type
- INDUSTRY
- Responsible Party
- SPONSOR
Study Record Dates
First Submitted
February 9, 2011
First Posted
February 11, 2011
Study Start
February 1, 2011
Primary Completion
November 1, 2013
Study Completion
November 1, 2013
Last Updated
November 2, 2022
Results First Posted
October 5, 2022
Record last verified: 2022-09