Real-World Utilization of an Intrauterine, Vacuum-Induced, Hemorrhage-Control Device.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the real-world effectiveness and safety of a U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA)-cleared intrauterine vacuum-induced-hemorrhage control device for postpartum hemorrhage (PPH) management. METHODS: Sixteen centers in the United States participated in this observational, postmarket registry medical record review (October 2020 through March 2022). The primary effectiveness outcome was treatment success , defined as bleeding control after insertion with no treatment escalation or bleeding recurrence. Additional outcomes included blood loss, time to device insertion, indwelling time, bleeding recurrence, and time to bleeding control. Treatment success and severe maternal morbidity measures (transfusion of 4 or more units of red blood cell, intensive care unit admission, and hysterectomy) were evaluated by blood loss before insertion. To assess safety, serious adverse events (SAEs) and adverse device effects were collected. All outcomes were summarized by mode of delivery; treatment success was summarized by bleeding cause (all causes, any atony, isolated atony, nonatony). RESULTS: In total, 800 individuals (530 vaginal births, 270 cesarean births) were treated with the device; 94.3% had uterine atony (alone or in combination with other causes). Median total blood loss at device insertion was 1,050 mL in vaginal births and 1,600 mL in cesarean births. Across all bleeding causes, the treatment success rate was 92.5% for vaginal births and was 83.7% for cesarean births (95.8% [n=307] and 88.2% [n=220], respectively, in isolated atony). Median indwelling time was 3.1 hours and 4.6 hours, respectively. In vaginal births, 14 SAEs were reported among 13 individuals (2.5%). In cesarean births, 22 SAEs were reported among 21 individuals (7.8%). Three (0.4%) SAEs were deemed possibly related to the device or procedure. No uterine perforations or deaths were reported. CONCLUSION: For both vaginal and cesarean births in real-world settings, rapid and effective bleeding control was achieved with an FDA-cleared intrauterine vacuum-induced hemorrhage-control device. The safety profile was consistent with that observed in the registrational trial (NCT02883673), and SAEs or adverse device effects were of the nature and severity expected in the setting of PPH. This device is an important new tool for managing a life-threatening condition, and timely utilization may help to improve obstetric hemorrhage outcomes. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov , NCT04995887.

Intrauterine Vacuum-Induced Hemorrhage-Control Device for Rapid Treatment of Postpartum Hemorrhage.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the effectiveness and safety of an intrauterine vacuum-induced hemorrhage-control device for postpartum hemorrhage treatment. METHODS: A multicenter, prospective, single-arm treatment study of a novel intrauterine device that uses low-level vacuum to induce uterine myometrial contraction to achieve control of abnormal postpartum uterine bleeding and postpartum hemorrhage was undertaken at 12 centers in the United States. The primary effectiveness endpoint was the proportion of participants in whom use of the intrauterine vacuum-induced hemorrhage-control device controlled abnormal bleeding without requiring escalating interventions. The primary safety endpoint was the incidence, severity, and seriousness of device-related adverse events. Secondary outcomes included time to bleeding control, rate of transfusion, and device usability scored by each investigator using the device. RESULTS: Of 107 participants enrolled with primary postpartum hemorrhage or abnormal postpartum uterine bleeding, 106 received any study treatment with the device connected to vacuum, and successful treatment was observed in 94% (100/106, 95% CI 88-98%) of these participants. In those 100 participants, definitive control of abnormal bleeding was reported in a median of 3 minutes (interquartile range 2.0-5.0) after connection to vacuum. Eight adverse events deemed possibly related to the device or procedure were reported, all of which were outlined as risks in the study and all of which resolved with treatment without serious clinical sequelae. Transfusion of 1-3 units of red blood cells was required in 35 participants, and five participants required 4 or more units of red blood cells. The majority of investigators reported the intrauterine vacuum-induced hemorrhage-control device as easy to use (98%) and would recommend it (97%). CONCLUSION: Intrauterine vacuum-induced hemorrhage control may provide a new rapid and effective treatment option for abnormal postpartum uterine bleeding or postpartum hemorrhage, with the potential to prevent severe maternal morbidity and mortality. FUNDING SOURCE: Alydia Health, Inc. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02883673.

Triangular Titanium Implants for Minimally Invasive Sacroiliac Joint Fusion: A Prospective Study.

Study Design Prospective multicenter single-arm interventional clinical trial. Objective To determine the degree of improvement in sacroiliac (SI) joint pain, disability related to SI joint pain, and quality of life in patients with SI joint dysfunction who undergo minimally invasive SI joint fusion using triangular-shaped titanium implants. Methods Subjects (n = 172) underwent minimally invasive SI joint fusion between August 2012 and January 2014 and completed structured assessments preoperatively and at 1, 3, 6, and 12 months postoperatively, including a 100-mm SI joint and back pain visual analog scale (VAS), Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), Short Form-36 (SF-36), and EuroQOL-5D. Patient satisfaction with surgery was assessed at 6 and 12 months. Results Mean SI joint pain improved from 79.8 at baseline to 30.0 and 30.4 at 6 and 12 months, respectively (mean improvements of 49.9 and 49.1 points, p < 0.0001 each). Mean ODI improved from 55.2 at baseline to 32.5 and 31.4 at 6 and 12 months (improvements of 22.7 and 23.9 points, p < 0.0001 each). SF-36 physical component summary improved from 31.7 at baseline to 40.2 and 40.3 at 6 and 12 months (p < 0.0001). At 6 and 12 months, 93 and 87% of subjects, respectively, were somewhat or very satisfied and 92 and 91%, respectively, would have the procedure again. Conclusions Minimally invasive SI joint fusion resulted in improvement of pain, disability, and quality of life in patients with SI joint dysfunction due to degenerative sacroiliitis and SI joint disruption.

Two-Year Outcomes from a Randomized Controlled Trial of Minimally Invasive Sacroiliac Joint Fusion vs. Non-Surgical Management for Sacroiliac Joint Dysfunction.

BACKGROUND: Sacroiliac joint (SIJ) dysfunction is an important and underappreciated cause of chronic low back pain. OBJECTIVE: To prospectively and concurrently compare outcomes after surgical and non-surgical treatment for chronic SIJ dysfunction. METHODS: One hundred and forty-eight subjects with SIJ dysfunction were randomly assigned to minimally invasive SIJ fusion with triangular titanium implants (SIJF, n = 102) or non-surgical management (NSM, n = 46). SIJ pain (measured with a 100-point visual analog scale, VAS), disability (measured with Oswestry Disability Index, ODI) and quality of life scores were collected at baseline and at scheduled visits to 24 months. Crossover from non-surgical to surgical care was allowed after the 6-month study visit was complete. Improvements in continuous measures were compared using repeated measures analysis of variance. The proportions of subjects with clinical improvement (SIJ pain improvement ≥20 points, ODI ≥15 points) and substantial clinical benefit (SIJ pain improvement ≥25 points or SIJ pain rating ≤35, ODI ≥18.8 points) were compared. RESULTS: In the SIJF group, mean SIJ pain improved rapidly and was sustained (mean improvement of 55.4 points) at month 24. The 6-month mean change in the NSM group (12.2 points) was substantially smaller than that in the SIJF group (by 38.3 points, p<.0001 for superiority). By month 24, 83.1% and 82.0% received either clinical improvement or substantial clinical benefit in VAS SIJ pain score. Similarly, 68.2% and 65.9% had received clinical improvement or substantial clinical benefit in ODI score at month 24. In the NSM group, these proportions were <10% with non-surgical treatment only. Parallel changes were seen for EQ-5D and SF-36, with larger changes in the surgery group at 6 months compared to NSM. The rate of adverse events related to SIJF was low and only 3 subjects assigned to SIJF underwent revision surgery within the 24-month follow-up period. CONCLUSIONS: In this Level 1 multicenter prospective randomized controlled trial, minimally invasive SIJF with triangular titanium implants provided larger improvements in pain, disability and quality of life compared to NSM. Improvements after SIJF persisted to 24 months. This study was approved by a local or central IRB before any subjects were enrolled. All patients provided study-specific informed consent prior to participation.

Randomized Controlled Trial of Minimally Invasive Sacroiliac Joint Fusion Using Triangular Titanium Implants vs Nonsurgical Management for Sacroiliac Joint Dysfunction: 12-Month Outcomes.

BACKGROUND: Sacroiliac joint (SIJ) dysfunction is a prevalent cause of chronic, unremitting lower back pain. OBJECTIVE: To concurrently compare outcomes after surgical and nonsurgical treatment for chronic SIJ dysfunction. METHODS: A total of 148 subjects with SIJ dysfunction were randomly assigned to minimally invasive SIJ fusion with triangular titanium implants (n = 102) or nonsurgical management (n = 46). Pain, disability, and quality-of-life scores were collected at baseline and at 1, 3, 6, and 12 months. Success rates were compared using Bayesian methods. Crossover from nonsurgical to surgical care was allowed after the 6-month study visit was complete. RESULTS: Six-month success rates were higher in the surgical group (81.4% vs 26.1%; posterior probability of superiority > 0.9999). Clinically important (≥ 15 point) Oswestry Disability Index improvement at 6 months occurred in 73.3% of the SIJ fusion group vs 13.6% of the nonsurgical management group (P < .001). At 12 months, improvements in SIJ pain and Oswestry Disability Index were sustained in the surgical group. Subjects who crossed over had improvements in pain, disability, and quality of life similar to those in the original surgical group. Adverse events were slightly more common in the surgical group (1.3 vs 1.1 events per subject; P = .31). CONCLUSION: This Level 1 study showed that minimally invasive SIJ fusion using triangular titanium implants was more effective than nonsurgical management at 1 year in relieving pain, improving function, and improving quality of life in patients with SIJ dysfunction caused by degenerative sacroiliitis or SIJ disruptions. Pain, disability, and quality of life also improved after crossover from nonsurgical to surgical treatment.

Safety and 6-month effectiveness of minimally invasive sacroiliac joint fusion: a prospective study.

BACKGROUND: Sacroiliac (SI) joint pain is an often overlooked cause of low back pain. SI joint arthrodesis has been reported to relieve pain and improve quality of life in patients suffering from degeneration or disruption of the SI joint who have failed non-surgical care. We report herein early results of a multicenter prospective single-arm cohort of patients with SI joint degeneration or disruption who underwent minimally invasive fusion using the iFuse Implant System®. METHODS: The safety cohort includes 94 subjects at 23 sites with chronic SI joint pain who met study eligibility criteria and underwent minimally invasive SI joint fusion with the iFuse Implant System® between August 2012 and September 2013. Subjects underwent structured assessments preoperatively, immediately postoperatively, and at 1, 3, and 6 months postoperatively, including SI joint and back pain visual analog scale (VAS), Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), Short Form-36 (SF-36), and EuroQoL-5D (EQ-5D). Patient satisfaction with surgery was assessed at 6 months. The effectiveness cohort includes the 32 subjects who have had 6-month follow-up to date. RESULTS: Mean subject age was 51 years (n=94, safety cohort) and 66% of patients were women. Subjects were highly debilitated at baseline (mean VAS pain score 78, mean ODI score 54). Three implants were used in 80% of patients; two patients underwent staged bilateral implants. Twenty-three adverse events occurred within 1 month of surgery and 29 additional events occurred between 30 days and latest follow-up. Six adverse events were severe but none were device-related. Complete 6-month postoperative follow-up was available in 26 subjects. In the effectiveness cohort, mean (± standard deviation) SI joint pain improved from a baseline score of 76 (±16.2) to a 6-month score of 29.3 (±23.3, an improvement of 49 points, P<0.0001), mean ODI improved from 55.3 (±10.7) to 38.9 (±18.5, an improvement of 15.8 points, P<0.0001) and SF-36 PCS improved from 30.7 (±4.3) to 37.0 (±10.7, an improvement of 6.7 points, P=0.003). Ninety percent of subjects who were ambulatory at baseline regained full ambulation by month 6; median time to full ambulation was 30 days. Satisfaction with the procedure was high at 85%. CONCLUSION: Minimally invasive SI joint fusion using the iFuse Implant System® is safe. Mid-term follow-up indicates a high rate of improvement in pain and function with high rates of patient satisfaction.