15 Clinical Trials for Various Conditions
This study is being done to prospectively collect data on subjects having posterior cervical fusion surgery using the Medtronic Infinity system. Researchers plan to collect information from patients having this type of surgery in order to learn more about patient how patients do after the surgery, including the rate of bone healing following surgery. The goal is for 250 patients to take part in the study or for 500 screws to be used, whichever comes first. Each patient will need a varying amount of screws to be used during their surgery. Because we are measuring the accuracy of each individual screw and the surgeon will likely use multiple screws during each surgery, it is likely that the study will reach its goal of 500 screws before 250 patients are enrolled in the study.
This is a prospective study to assess fusion rates and cervical sagittal parameters following posterior cervical arthrodesis procedures supplemented with CIS. Data will be collected from medical records for up to 730 days after surgery. Data to be collected will be demographic, preoperative clinical information, surgical details, and radiographic information. Patients will also undergo a non-standard of care CT scan 2 years after surgery.
The purpose of this research is to test if that combining bone marrow aspirate (removing bone marrow with a needle) concentration with locally harvested (collected) autograft (patient's own bone from another part of the body) for use as the bone graft results in equal rates of a successful procedure (fusion), as compared to current best practice in high-risk patients undergoing posterior cervical fusion. Hypothesis: Bone marrow aspirate concentration combined with locally harvested autograft results in equivalent rates of bony fusion, as compared to current best practice in high-risk patients undergoing posterior cervical decompression and fusion.
The purpose of the study is to see whether a clavicle splint can decrease the pain after posterior cervicothoracic surgery. The term "cervicle splint" conveys that the investigators do not deal with clavicle fractures here but use the splint he stabilize the posterior cervical area. The investigators want to demonstrate this in a prospective randomized manner.
The goal of this randomized, double-blinded, clinical trial is to assess the benefit of administering a Multifidus Cervicis Plane (MCP) block compared to a sham block as a method of postoperative pain control in patients undergoing posterior cervical spine fusion surgery. The main question it aims to answer is if the MCP block group will have reduced maximum pain scores during the first 24 postoperative hours compared to the sham block group. Participants will receive preoperative bilateral MCP blocks on the back of their neck using the standard of care local anesthetic solution that consists of 30 mLs 0.25% Bupivacaine + 0.5 mL (5 mg) preservative-free Dexamethasone + 0.1 mL Epinephrine (MCP block group). Researchers will compare the MCP block to the preoperative sham block which consists of injecting 3 mL of normal saline into the same area (Sham block group) to compare the postoperative pain scores between the groups as a main objective. The secondary objectives are: * Postoperative opioid consumption during hospitalization and at 2 weeks after discharge. * The amount and type of non-opioid analgesics used during hospitalization. * The occurrence of postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) and the use of antiemetics. * Hospital and Post Anesthesia Care Unit length of stay (LOS). * Monitor the safety of the study interventions during hospitalization and readmissions within 30 days of discharge. * Patient satisfaction with pain management and overall satisfaction with the surgery experience.
Cervical collars are commonly used to provide external immobilization after elective Posterior Cervical Laminectomy and Interbody Fusion (PCLIF). The rationale for collar use is the perception and assumption that it can prevent early instrumentation failure and promote successful spinal fusion. However, there are a number of potential complications associated with cervical collars such as skin breakdown, ulceration, neck pain, impedance upon activities of daily living, and impaired swallowing. Considering these conflicting factors, there is wide disagreement among spinal surgeons about the utility, benefits, and necessity of collar use following elective PCLIF. Hypothesis: Wearing a cervical collar for 12 weeks after posterior cervical laminectomy and instrumented fusion will not demonstrate substantial benefits as measured by the incidence of instrumentation failure, rate of nonunion, or clinical outcome measures. Specific Aim I: To compare the outcomes of surgery in patients who will wear a cervical collar for 12 weeks following surgery versus those who will have the collar removed prior to discharge after surgery.
Participants who have a surgical procedure called Posterior Cervical (neck) Spine Surgery will normally need pain medication to relieve post operative pain. This usually includes opioid medications. In this study, the consented participant may receive a nerve block procedure, in addition to the pain relieving medication. There is a fifty-fifty chance to receive the nerve block. The goal is to see if the nerve block group needs less opioid medication, has lower pain scores and is discharged from the hospital sooner.
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.
This study will evaluate the safety and effectiveness of a device called "Posterior Cervical Stabilization System or PCSS" when used along with posterior cervical fusion (PCF) in combination with anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) in the treatment of multi-level cervical degenerative disease.
To achieve appropriate exposure for an anterior neck surgery (for example an Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion or ACDF), patients are positioned supine with their neck extended. Due to being in this position, patients frequently complain of posterior neck stiffness and pain postoperatively in addition to the anterior incisional pain. This posterior cervical pain can be classified as myofascial pain. Cervical myofascial pain is thought to be the result of overuse or trauma to the supporting muscles of the neck and shoulders. Trigger point injections are one of the methods used to treat myofascial pain. The trigger point injection procedure is where a physician (typically an anesthesiologist) performs an exam of the patient neck and upper back and finds areas of point tenderness. The physician will then inject a small amount of numbing medication (such as bupivacaine) into the muscle or tissue in that area. Trigger point injections have been shown to be superior to botox injections or dry needling, and equivalent to physical therapy. However, these studies were performed on patients with chronic neck pain. There are no studies evaluating the effectiveness of trigger point injections on post anterior cervical surgery patients. At our institution, trigger point injections with local anesthetic are used as part of a multimodal pain control regimen for post-anterior cervical surgery patients. Our hypothesis is if the addition of trigger point injections to standard of care multi-modal post-operative pain control will decrease patients' myofascial pain, and thereby decrease the amount of narcotic pain medication used.
The purpose of the study is to determine the optimal surgical approach (ventral versus dorsal) for patients with multi-level cervical spondylotic myelopathy (CSM). There are no established guidelines for the management of patients with CSM, which slowly causes spinal cord injury in afflicted patients. This study aims to test the hypothesis that ventral surgery (decompressing the spinal cord from the front of the neck) and dorsal surgery (decompressing the spinal cord from the back of the neck) might differ in their overall outcome or major complication rate.
Assess clinical and radiographic outcomes in patients who undergo 1-3 level anterior cervical discectomy fusion (ACDF) or lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF, PLIF, ALIF, or LLIF) using ViBone.
The purpose of this clinical investigation is to evaluate the Aspen™ device compared to pedicle screw instrumentation for posterior fixation in the treatment of patients with degenerative disc disease and/or spondylolisthesis. The Aspen™ device will be compared to pedicle screw instrumentation in Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) improvement and success of fusion.
The aim of the study is to determine the relative effectiveness of the PediGuardTM , a device manufactured by SpineVision, Inc, for placement of a pedicle screw pilot (drill) hole and for reducing pedicle screw breaches during thoracic and lumbar pedicle screw fixation of the spine. Hypothesis #1 The PediGuardTM will be more accurate for pedicle screw placement as compared to other standard manual techniques of similar size of pedicle screw insertion. At least 90% of screws placed with the PediGuardTM will be positioned correctly in the pedicle (defined as less than 2 mm breach by CT scan). In contrast, only 80% of screws using manual placement will be positioned correctly in the pedicle. Hypothesis #2 The PediGuardTM will not be inferior to fluoroscopic techniques for pedicle screw insertion. Both techniques will achieve at least 90% accuracy in the placement of pedicle screws.
A multi-center, prospective, observational patient registry to collect information on the clinical outcomes and "real world" use of approved and commercially available bone graft substitutes, autograft and allograft.