Skip to main content
Key Specialties
Cardiology Diabetology Endocrinology Gastroenterology Geriatrics and Gerontology Gynecology and Obstetrics Hematology Infectious Disease Internal Medicine Nephrology Neurology Oncology Pediatrics Respiratory Medicine Rheumatology Surgery
Congress Coverage
2024 ACC Congress 2023 ESMO Congress 2023 EASD Congress 2023 ERS Congress 2023 ESC Congress
Clinical Collections
Advances in Alzheimer’s

At a glance: The STEP trials

A round-up of the STEP phase 3 clinical trials evaluating semaglutide for weight loss in people with overweight or obesity.
ADVANCED SEARCH
Log in
Top
Trials
Published in: Trials 1/2015

Open Access 01-12-2015 | Study protocol

Surgeon, staff, and patient radiation exposure in minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion: impact of 3D fluoroscopy-based navigation partially replacing conventional fluoroscopy: study protocol for a randomized controlled trial

Authors: Ulrich Hubbe, Ronen Sircar, Christian Scheiwe, Christoph Scholz, Evangelos Kogias, Marie Therese Krüger, Florian Volz, Jan-Helge Klingler

Published in: Trials | Issue 1/2015

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

Some symptomatic degenerative conditions of the lumbar spine may be treated with spinal fusion if conservative treatment has failed. The minimally invasive technique of transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (MIS TLIF) is increasingly used but has been found to generate increased radiation exposure to the patient and staff. Modern three-dimensional (3D) C-arm devices are capable of providing conventional two-dimensional fluoroscopic images (x-rays) as well as 3D image sets for intraoperative navigation. This study was designed to compare the radiation exposure between these two intraoperative imaging techniques in MIS TLIF procedures.

Methods

This study is a randomized controlled trial. Forty participants scheduled to undergo monosegmental MIS TLIF will be recruited and randomly allocated to one of two groups with respect to the applied intraoperative imaging technique: conventional fluoroscopy (FLUORO group) and 3D fluoroscopy-based navigation combined with conventional fluoroscopy (NAV group). Furthermore, patients scheduled to undergo bisegmental MIS TLIF during the recruitment period for monosegmental MIS TLIF will be assessed for eligibility and will be randomly assigned separately. The primary endpoint is the radiation exposure to the surgeon and is measured by dosimeter readings. Secondary endpoints are the radiation exposure to the assistant surgeon, scrub nurse, anesthetist, patient, and C-arm as well as radiation exposure in relation to the body mass index of the patient.

Discussion

Results of this randomized study will help to compare the radiation exposure to the operating staff and patient during MIS TLIF procedures using conventional fluoroscopy versus 3D fluoroscopy-based navigation combined with conventional fluoroscopy. Furthermore, recommendations regarding the appropriate use of the investigated intraoperative imaging techniques will be made to improve radiation protection and to reduce radiation exposure.

Trial registration

Registration number of the German Clinical Trials Register: DRKS00004514. Registration date: 11 August 2012.
Literature
1.
Lee KH, Yue WM, Yeo W, Soeharno H, Tan SB. Clinical and radiological outcomes of open versus minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion. Eur Spine J. 2012;21:2265–70.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
2.
Foley KT, Holly LT, Schwender JD. Minimally invasive lumbar fusion. Spine. 2003;28:S26–35.PubMed
3.
Tian N-F, Wu Y-S, Zhang X-L, Xu H-Z, Chi Y-L, Mao F-M. Minimally invasive versus open transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion: a meta-analysis based on the current evidence. Eur Spine J. 2013;22:1741–9.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
4.
Klingler JH, Sircar R, Scheiwe C, Kogias E, Volz F, Krüger MT, et al.: Comparative Study of C-Arms for Intraoperative 3-Dimensional Imaging and Navigation in Minimally Invasive Spine Surgery Part I - Applicability and Image Quality. J Spinal Disord Tech. 2014:1. doi:10.1097/BSD.0000000000000186.
5.
Stubig T, Kendoff D, Citak M, Geerling J, Khalafi A, Krettek C, et al. Comparative study of different intraoperative 3-D image intensifiers in orthopedic trauma care. J Trauma. 2009;66:821–30.CrossRefPubMed
6.
Berjano P, Lamartina C. Classification of degenerative segment disease in adults with deformity of the lumbar or thoracolumbar spine. Eur Spine J. 2014;23:1815–24.CrossRefPubMed
7.
Klingler JH, Sircar R, Scheiwe C, Kogias E, Krüger MT, Scholz C, et al: Comparative Study of C-Arms for Intraoperative 3-Dimensional Imaging and Navigation in Minimally Invasive Spine Surgery Part II - Radiation Exposure. J Spinal Disord Tech. 2014:1. doi:10.1097/BSD.0000000000000187.
8.
Mavrogenis AF, Papagelopoulos PJ, Korres DS, Papadopoulos K, Sakas DE, Pneumaticos S. Accuracy of pedicle screw placement using intraoperative neurophysiological monitoring and computed tomography. J Long Term Eff Med Implants. 2009;19:41–8.CrossRefPubMed
9.
10.
11.
Bindal RK, Glaze S, Ognoskie M, Tunner V, Malone R, Ghosh S. Surgeon and patient radiation exposure in minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion. J Neurosurg Spine. 2008;9:570–3.CrossRefPubMed
12.
Rampersaud YR, Foley KT, Shen AC, Williams S, Solomito M. Radiation exposure to the spine surgeon during fluoroscopically assisted pedicle screw insertion. Spine. 2000;25:2637–45.CrossRefPubMed
13.
Perisinakis K, Theocharopoulos N, Damilakis J, Katonis P, Papadokostakis G, Hadjipavlou A, et al. Estimation of patient dose and associated radiogenic risks from fluoroscopically guided pedicle screw insertion. Spine. 2004;29:1555–60.CrossRefPubMed
14.
Giordano BD, Baumhauer JF, Morgan TL, Rechtine GR. Cervical spine imaging using standard C-arm fluoroscopy: patient and surgeon exposure to ionizing radiation. Spine. 2008;33:1970–6.CrossRefPubMed
Metadata
Title
Surgeon, staff, and patient radiation exposure in minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion: impact of 3D fluoroscopy-based navigation partially replacing conventional fluoroscopy: study protocol for a randomized controlled trial
Authors
Ulrich Hubbe
Ronen Sircar
Christian Scheiwe
Christoph Scholz
Evangelos Kogias
Marie Therese Krüger
Florian Volz
Jan-Helge Klingler
Publication date
01-12-2015
Publisher
BioMed Central
Published in
Trials / Issue 1/2015
Electronic ISSN: 1745-6215
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s13063-015-0690-5

Other articles of this Issue 1/2015

Trials 1/2015 Go to the issue

Research

Staff’s views on delivering patient-led therapy during inpatient stroke rehabilitation: a focus group study with lessons for trial fidelity

Study protocol

Could enteral nutrition improve the outcome of patients with haematological malignancies undergoing allogeneic haematopoietic stem cell transplantation? A study protocol for a randomized controlled trial (the NEPHA study)

Research

Mindfulness-based cognitive therapy for inflammatory bowel disease patients: findings from an exploratory pilot randomised controlled trial

Study protocol

Reducing suicidal thoughts in the Australian general population through web-based self-help: study protocol for a randomized controlled trial

Study protocol

Influence of Morphine on Pharmacokinetics and Pharmacodynamics of Ticagrelor in Patients with Acute Myocardial Infarction (IMPRESSION): study protocol for a randomized controlled trial

Study protocol

Informal Health Provider and Practical Approach to Lung Health interventions to improve the detection of chronic airways disease and tuberculosis at primary care level in Malawi: study protocol for a randomised controlled trial