Literature DB >> 27228511

MILD® Is an Effective Treatment for Lumbar Spinal Stenosis with Neurogenic Claudication: MiDAS ENCORE Randomized Controlled Trial.

Ramsin M Benyamin, Peter S Staats1, Investigators MiDAS Encore.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS) is a common degenerative condition of the spine, which is a major cause of pain and functional disability for the elderly. Neurogenic claudication symptoms are a hallmark of LSS, where patients develop low back or leg pain when walking or standing that is relieved by sitting or lumbar flexion. The treatment of LSS generally begins with conservative management such as physical therapy, home exercise programs, and oral analgesics. Once these therapies fail, patients commonly move forward with interventional pain treatment options such as epidural steroid injections (ESIs) or MILD® as the next step.
OBJECTIVE: To assess improvement of function and reduction in pain for Medicare beneficiaries following treatment with MILD (treatment group) in LSS patients with neurogenic claudication and verified ligamentum flavum hypertrophy and to compare to a control group receiving ESIs. STUDY
DESIGN: Prospective, multi-center, randomized controlled clinical trial.
SETTING: Twenty-six US interventional pain management centers.
METHODS: Patients in this trial were randomized one to one into 2 study arms. A total of 302 patients were enrolled, with 149 randomized to MILD and 153 to the active control. Outcomes are assessed using the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), Numeric Pain Rating Scale (NPRS) and Zurich Claudication Questionnaire (ZCQ). Primary efficacy is the proportion of ODI responders, tested for statistical superiority of the MILD group versus the ESI group. ODI responders are defined as patients achieving the validated Minimal Important Change (MIC) of = 10 point improvement in ODI from baseline to follow-up. Similarly, secondary efficacy is the proportion of NPRS and ZCQ responders using validated MIC thresholds. Primary safety is the incidence of device- or procedure-related adverse events in each group. This report presents safety and efficacy results at 1-year follow-up. Outcomes at 2 years will be collected and reported for patients in the MILD group only.
RESULTS: At 1-year follow-up, ODI, NPRS, and all 3 ZCQ domains (Symptom Severity, Physical Function and Patient Satisfaction) demonstrated statistically significant superiority of MILD versus the active control. For primary efficacy, the 58.0% ODI responder rate in the MILD group was higher than the 27.1% responder rate in the epidural steroid group (P < 0.001). The primary safety endpoint was achieved, demonstrating that there is no difference in safety between MILD and ESIs (P = 1.00). LIMITATIONS: There was a lack of patient blinding due to considerable differences in treatment protocols, and a potentially higher non-responder rate for both groups versus standard-of-care due to adjunctive pain therapy study restrictions. Study enrollment was not limited to patients that had never received ESI therapy.
CONCLUSIONS: One-year results of this randomized controlled clinical trial demonstrate that MILD is statistically superior to ESIs in the treatment of LSS patients with neurogenic claudication and verified central stenosis due to ligamentum flavum hypertrophy. Primary and secondary efficacy outcome measures achieved statistical superiority in the MILD group compared to the control group. With 95% of patients in this study presenting with 5 or more LSS co-factors, it is important to note that patients with spinal co-morbidities also experienced statistically significant improved function that was durable through 1 year. KEY WORDS: MILD, minimally invasive lumbar decompression, interlaminar epidural steroid injections, ESI neurogenic claudication, ligamentum flavum, ENCORE, PILD, CED Study, LSS.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2016        PMID: 27228511

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Pain Physician        ISSN: 1533-3159            Impact factor:   4.965


  13 in total

Review 1.  Spinal Cord Stimulation, MILD Procedure, and Regenerative Medicine, Novel Interventional Nonopioid Therapies in Chronic Pain.

Authors:  Ken P Ehrhardt; Susan M Mothersele; Andrew J Brunk; Jeremy B Green; Mark R Jones; Craig B Billeaud; Alan David Kaye
Journal:  Curr Pain Headache Rep       Date:  2018-03-19

2.  Percutaneous thoracolumbar decompression combined with percutaneous pedicle screw fixation and fusion: a method for treating spinal degenerative pain in a biplane angiography suite with the avoidance of general anesthesia.

Authors:  Bohdan W Chopko
Journal:  J Spine Surg       Date:  2016-06

3.  The durability of minimally invasive lumbar decompression procedure in patients with symptomatic lumbar spinal stenosis: Long-term follow-up.

Authors:  Nagy Mekhail; Shrif Costandi; George Nageeb; Catherine Ekladios; Ogena Saied
Journal:  Pain Pract       Date:  2021-05-13       Impact factor: 3.079

4.  A comparative study of three conservative treatments in patients with lumbar spinal stenosis: lumbar spinal stenosis with acupuncture and physical therapy study (LAP study).

Authors:  Hiroyuki Oka; Ko Matsudaira; Yuichi Takano; Daichi Kasuya; Masaki Niiya; Juichi Tonosu; Masayoshi Fukushima; Yasushi Oshima; Tomoko Fujii; Sakae Tanaka; Hirohiko Inanami
Journal:  BMC Complement Altern Med       Date:  2018-01-19       Impact factor: 3.659

5.  Comparative efficacy and safety of surgical and invasive treatments for adults with degenerative lumbar spinal stenosis: protocol for a network meta-analysis and systematic review.

Authors:  Lingxiao Chen; Paulo H Ferreira; Paula R Beckenkamp; Manuela L Ferreira
Journal:  BMJ Open       Date:  2019-04-04       Impact factor: 2.692

6.  The Impact of Age on the Outcomes of Minimally Invasive Lumbar Decompression for Lumbar Spinal Stenosis.

Authors:  Nagy A Mekhail; Shrif J Costandi; Sherif Armanyous; Ricardo Vallejo; Lawrence R Poree; Lora L Brown; Stanley Golovac; Timothy R Deer
Journal:  Med Devices (Auckl)       Date:  2020-06-04

Review 7.  Multidisciplinary Firms and the Treatment of Chronic Pain: A Case Study of Low Back Pain.

Authors:  Julie G Pilitsis; Olga Khazen; Nikolai G Wenzel
Journal:  Front Pain Res (Lausanne)       Date:  2021-11-10

8.  A Retrospective, Single-Center, Quantitative Analysis of Adverse Events in Patients Undergoing Spinal Stenosis with Neurogenic Claudication Using a Novel Percutaneous Direct Lumbar Decompression Strategy.

Authors:  Jason E Pope; Timothy R Deer; Steven M Falowski
Journal:  J Pain Res       Date:  2021-06-24       Impact factor: 3.133

9.  Decompression Surgery versus Interspinous Devices for Lumbar Spinal Stenosis: A Systematic Review of the Literature.

Authors:  Jennifer Tram; Shanmukha Srinivas; Arvin R Wali; Courtney S Lewis; Martin H Pham
Journal:  Asian Spine J       Date:  2020-01-08

10.  Objective Real-World Outcomes of Patients Suffering from Painful Neurogenic Claudication Treated with the mild® Procedure: Interim 6-Month Report of a Randomized Controlled Trial.

Authors:  Timothy Deer; Christopher Kim; Sayed Emal Wahezi; Huaguang Qu; Dawood Sayed
Journal:  J Pain Res       Date:  2021-06-10       Impact factor: 3.133

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.