Skip to content

Comparative study between endoscopic decompression using uniportal/biportal endoscope, conventional decompression, and decompression using tubular retractor in central spinal stenosis (prospective multicenter study)

Comparative study between endoscopic decompression using uniportal/biportal endoscope, conventional decompression, and decompression using tubular retractor in central spinal stenosis (prospective multicenter study)

Status
Recruiting
Phases
Unknown
Study type
Interventional
Source
CRIS
Registry ID
KCT0004355
Enrollment
256
Registered
2019-10-18
Start date
2019-09-26
Completion date
Unknown
Last updated
2019-11-05

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

Conditions

None listed

Interventions

Procedure/Surgery : Patients with spinal stenosis who require surgical treatment are included. Surgery is performed according to four different surgical procedures. Surgical methods are divided into C

Sponsors

Yonsei University Health System, Gangnam Severance Hospital
Lead Sponsor

Eligibility

Sex/Gender
All

Inclusion criteria

Inclusion criteria: i. Men or women between the ages of 20-85 ii. Patients with back pain, lower limb pain, neurological intermittent claudication for more than 3 months iii. Spinal stenosis is observed on the sagittal plane and cross-section of the spinal MRI iv. There is no response after taking analgesic for more than 1 month v. In the case of a systemic condition that can withstand surgery by general anesthesia vi. Health status to participate in the study

Exclusion criteria

Exclusion criteria: i. Unclear or suspicious symptoms ii. Previous urgical histroy on treatment level iii. Spondylolisthesis abvoe grade II requires surgery iv. Fracture or dislocation v. Vertebral body is destroyed or structurally damaged vi. Vertebral body or disc infection vii. Vertebral body is damaged by metastatic disease

Design outcomes

Primary

MeasureTime frame
The degree of muscle damage (CK) was measured and the difference between the four surgical methods was compared and analyzed.

Secondary

MeasureTime frame
The VAS score was assessed at the outpatient visit and evaluated as a successful outcome if the VAS score was reduced by at least 2 points compared with the preoperative level, no adverse event requiring reoperation related to the procedure, no neurological deficit or exacerbation;ODI and SF-36 were measured to observe any improvements in the baseline. In the radiological examinations, disc height narrowing, segmental lordosis, and whole lumbar lordosis were examined.

Countries

Korea, Republic of

Contacts

Public ContactJeong-Yoon Park

Yonsei University Health System, Gangnam Severance Hospital

spinepjy@yushs.ac+82-2-2019-3390

Outcome results

None listed

Source: CRIS (via WHO ICTRP) · Data processed: Feb 5, 2026