Skip to content

A trial comparing minimally invasive spinal surgery with open spinal surgery to treat narrowing of the spinal canal

Randomised Controlled Non-inferiority Trial Of Minimally Invasive Versus Standard Open Decompression For Degenerative Lumbar Canal Stenosis, comparing functional outcomes, pain scores, and complications in both procedures.

Status
Not yet recruiting
Phases
Phase 3
Study type
Interventional
Source
ANZCTR
Registry ID
ACTRN12612000780853
Enrollment
30
Registered
2012-07-24
Start date
2012-08-01
Completion date
Unknown
Last updated
2020-01-13

For informational purposes only — not medical advice. Sourced from public registries and may not reflect the latest updates. Terms

Conditions

None listed

Brief summary

Surgical decompression of the lumbar canal in patients with significant symptoms of claudication or radicular pain and a radiological diagnosis of canal stenosis is both efficacious and well tolerated, with sustained long term benefits. Historically, lumbar canal stenosis was treated with complete laminectomy but recognition that the pathology is largely at the level of the disc and interlaminar space has led to less destructive approaches such as interlaminar decompression or laminotomy. Despite this, all published series report some morbidity and complications from surgery in what is typically an elderly population, such as dural tear, infection, persistent back pain and the need for blood transfusion or further surgical intervention. One concern is that of post-operative spondylolisthesis, which is thought to occur from disruption of the spinous processes and interspinous ligament, observed in up to 30% in some series. Minimally invasive techniques for decompression of the lumbar canal using a micro-endoscopic approach have been described and are growing in popularity. Instead of a midline posterior approach to the spinal canal, where the muscles are dissected bilaterally and the posterior spinal structures removed, a minimally invasive technique uses a unilateral, paramedian approach where the muscles are preserved and surgery is carried out through an 18mm diameter working tube. The surgical field is illuminated and magnified under the operating microscope and custom designed bayoneted instruments are employed to avoid obscuring vision. The spinal canal is decompressed in the same way as one would using an open approach but the posterior spinal structures are largely preserved, which offers a biomechanical advantage with the potential to reduce late spondylolisthesis. The less destructive approach should also reduce early post-operative back pain, promote more rapid mobilisation, and consequently reduce the number of inpatient hospital days. There is a growing body of evidence supporting the efficacy of this technique for treating patients with lumbar canal stenosis though there are concerns over the adequacy of decompression through a small operating tube and the learning curve associated with the adoption of this less invasive but potentially more restricted technique. Thus far, a number of observational studies have implied early advantages to patients offered minimally invasive over open lumbar canal decompression, there has yet to be a properly conducted and appropriately powered randomised controlled trial to confirm that the techniques are similarly effective in terms of medium to long-term functional outcome. A phase III non-inferiority trial design, i.e., to show that minimally invasive lumbar canal decompression is not inferior to standard open lumbar decompression, is considered to be the most stringent and statistically appropriate trial design to answer this important question. Trial participants will be recruited from patients undergoing elective open or minimally invasive decompressive lumbar laminectomy for degenerative lumbar canal stenosis at the Mater Misericordiae Private Hospital. After obtaining consent for the patients’ participation in the trial, they will undergo pre-operative clinical and radiological assessment by their consultant surgeon, including MRI and X-ray lumbar spine, in the usual way. Baseline questionnaires will be obtained pre-operatively. After randomisation to either surgical arm, open or minimally invasive lumbar decompression surgery will proceed in the usual way. There will be no changes to the usual surgical management of the patient resulting from the trial. Post operative management will proceed in the usual way, with no changes to normal post operative surgical management. Patients will complete outcome questionnaires prior to discharge. Patients will be assessed for discharge by a physiotherapist and their surgeon, and discharged at a clinically appropriate time in the usual way. Patients will be followed up at their routine appointment with the consultant surgeon. Outcome questionnaires will be completed at periods up to 24 months post operatively, and a follow up X-ray and MRI lumbar spine will be obtained. Data obtained will allow comparison of the outcomes of the two surgical procedures, including patient outcome measures, morbidity and adverse events, and radiological outcomes including extent of decompression and development of late spondylolisthesis.

Interventions

Minimally invasive decompressive laminectomy - the hypertrophied ligamentum flavum and facets are undercut with surgical access through a small working tube, as opposed to a long midline incision. In this manner the spinal canal and neural elements are decompressed, whilst preserving the spinal extensor muscles, and the spinous processes. The procedure takes approximately 90-120 minutes of operating time.

Sponsors

Jason McMillen
Lead SponsorIndividual

Study design

Allocation
Randomised controlled trial
Intervention model
Parallel
Primary purpose
Treatment
Masking
Blinded (masking used)

Eligibility

Sex/Gender
All
Age
18 Years to No maximum
Healthy volunteers
No

Inclusion criteria

Patients with symptomatic degenerative lumbar canal stenosis with neurogenic claudication and/or lumbar radiculopathy

Exclusion criteria

Cauda equina syndrome Requirement for instrumentation Prevous lumbar spine surgery at the affected level(s) Dependent in ADLs (Karnofsky Score <60) Psychiatric illness Other significant comorbidities that may affect pain scores

Outcome results

None listed

Source: ANZCTR · Data processed: Feb 4, 2026