Comparing two surgical methods for lumbar degenerative disease
Official title: Decompression Versus Instrumented Fusion for Lumbar Degenerative Disease. Clinical and Biomechanical Outcome Study
Run by Azienda Usl di Bologna · NCT06335511 · Data updated 2026-05-14
This study is no longer in our active list. It may have stopped recruiting or finished. The details below are as of 2026-05-14 and are kept for reference. Check ClinicalTrials.gov for its current status, or see similar studies below.
This study is testing which of two surgical methods for treating lumbar degenerative stenosis works better for patients by comparing their outcomes after surgery.
Quick facts
| Study type | Observational |
|---|---|
| Ages | 18 Years and up |
| Sex | All |
| Enrollment | 100 (estimated) |
| Sponsor | Azienda Usl di Bologna Government |
| Locations | 2 sites (Bologna and 1 other locations) |
| Trial ID | NCT06335511 on ClinicalTrials.gov |
Is this trial a fit for you?
✓Likely a good fit
Ideal candidates are individuals with degenerative lumbar stenosis who have not responded to conservative treatment and meet specific radiological criteria.
✕Probably not a fit
Patients with congenital, traumatic, or neoplastic lumbar stenosis, or those who have had previous lumbar surgery, may not benefit from this study.
A plain-English reading of the study's rules. Only the study team can confirm whether you qualify.
What this trial studies
This study aims to identify clinical and biomechanical parameters that can predict outcomes for patients undergoing surgery for lumbar degenerative stenosis. It will recruit two groups of patients with symptomatic lumbar stenosis who will receive either microsurgical decompression or decompression with instrumented fusion. The clinical and mechanical outcomes of these two surgical approaches will be compared to determine the most effective treatment. Additionally, an in-vitro biomechanical study will assess the effects of both techniques, providing data to tailor surgical approaches to individual patient needs.
Why it matters
Potential benefit: If successful, this study could lead to more personalized and effective surgical treatments for patients with lumbar degenerative disease.
How similar studies have gone: Other studies have explored similar surgical approaches, but this study aims to provide robust data specific to the comparison of these two techniques.
Who can join: the full rules
Show full inclusion / exclusion criteria
Inclusion Criteria: * degenerative lumbar stenosis caused by bone hypertrophy, osteoarthritis of facet joints, ligamentous hypertrophy, disc protrusion * midsagittal spinal canal diameter of 12 mm or less * no radiological signs of instability, i.e. pathological motion on preoperative dynamic lumbar X-ray * ongoing symptoms for a minimum of 12 weeks with no improvement to conservative treatment * eligibility for decompression alone (MiD) or decompression and fusion (MiD+F) Exclusion Criteria: * congenital, traumatic, infectious and neoplastic lumbar stenosis, * spondylolisthesis (on static X-ray), lumbar scoliosis (Cobb\>10°), * previous lumbar surgery, other types of operations (endoscopic decompression, anterior interbody fusions, interspinous devices etc.). * patients with spine deformity requiring long fusion (i.e. \>=3 levels)
Where it's running
-
IRCCS Istituto Ortopedico Rizzolo
Bologna, Italy Recruiting -
IRCCS Istituto delle Scienze Neurologiche di Bologna
Bologna, Italy Recruiting
Study contacts
- Principal investigator: Alfredo Conti, Prof. — IRCCS Istituto delle Scienze Neurologiche di Bologna
- Study coordinator: Alfredo Conti, Prof.
- Email: alfredo.conti2@unibo.it
- Phone: +393382131017
Similar studies
Other studies for the same condition or treatment. Recruiting studies are listed first.
-
Effect of Irrigation Pressure on Postoperative Complications and Surgical Field Clarity in Unilateral Biportal Endoscopic Spine Surgery
This study tests whether the height of the irrigation fluid bag and the direction of the surgical cut affect fluid pressure, visibility, and early recovery in adults undergoing unilateral biportal endoscopic spine surgery.
-
Microdecompression alone vs. decompression with fusion in adjacent segment stenosis
This trial tests whether a less invasive microdecompression can work as well as adding a fusion extension for people with adjacent segment stenosis after prior lumbar fusion.
-
Comparison of two TLIF procedures for single-level lumbar spinal stenosis
This trial tests two minimally invasive TLIF procedures (LUSE-TLIF and MIS-TLIF) to see which better helps people with single-level lumbar spinal stenosis who have not improved with non-surgical treatments.
-
Opioid-free versus opioid-based anesthesia for elective lumbar spine surgery
This test compares opioid-free multimodal anesthesia (with or without an erector spinae plane block) against opioid-containing anesthesia in adults having elective lumbar spine surgery to see which controls pain better and reduces opioid need in the first 48 hours after surgery.
-
Prevalence of PAD in Patients With Surgically Treated Lumbar Spinal Stenosis
This study tests how common peripheral artery disease is in people who have lumbar spinal stenosis and are being considered for, or have had, surgery.
-
Decompressive laminectomy alone versus laminectomy with transpedicular screw fixation for lumbar spinal stenosis
Adults age 30–60 with multilevel lumbar spinal stenosis who haven't improved after six weeks of non-surgical care will be randomly assigned to decompressive laminectomy alone or to laminectomy plus transpedicular screw fixation to see which option relieves pain, improves function, and gives better spinal stability.
How to take part
- Review the eligibility criteria above with your treating physician.
- Check the official listing on ClinicalTrials.gov for the latest contact details and recruitment status.
- Contact the study coordinator or principal investigator to ask for pre-screening. Pre-screening is free and never obligates you to enroll.