Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
The MOTION study: Two-year results of a real-world randomized controlled trial of the mild® procedure for treatment of lumbar spinal stenosis.
Deer, Timothy R; Chafin, Timothy B; Costandi, Shrif J; Qu, Huaguang; Kim, Christopher; Jassal, Navdeep; Patel, Kiran; Calodney, Aaron.
Affiliation
  • Deer TR; The Spine & Nerve Centers of the Virginias, Charleston, West Virginia, USA.
  • Chafin TB; Vidant Roanoke-Chowan Hospital, Ahoskie, North Carolina, USA.
  • Costandi SJ; Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, Ohio, USA.
  • Qu H; Pennsylvania Pain& Spine Institute, Chalfont, Pennsylvania, USA.
  • Kim C; The Spine & Nerve Centers of the Virginias, Charleston, West Virginia, USA.
  • Jassal N; Excel Pain and Spine, Lakeland, Florida, USA.
  • Patel K; The Spine & Pain Institute of New York, New Hyde Park, New York, USA.
  • Calodney A; Precision Spine Care, Tyler, Texas, USA.
Pain Pract ; 24(1): 109-119, 2024 Jan.
Article in En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37661347
ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE:

The MOTION study is designed to measure the impact of percutaneous image-guided lumbar decompression as a first-line therapy on patients otherwise receiving real-world conventional medical management for lumbar spinal stenosis with neurogenic claudication secondary to hypertrophic ligamentum flavum. This prospective, multicenter randomized controlled trial uses objective and patient-reported outcome measures to compare the combination of the mild® percutaneous treatment and nonsurgical conventional medical management (CMM) to CMM-Alone.

METHODS:

Test group patients received the mild procedure after study enrollment. Test and control groups were allowed conventional conservative therapies and low-risk interventional therapies as recommended by their physicians. Subjective outcomes included the Oswestry Disability Index, Numeric Pain Rating Scale, and Zurich Claudication Questionnaire. Objective outcomes included a validated Walking Tolerance Test, the rate of subsequent lumbar spine interventions, and safety data.

RESULTS:

Two-year follow-up included 64 mild + CMM and 67 CMM-Alone patients. All outcome measures showed significant improvement from baseline for mild + CMM, whereas the majority of CMM-Alone patients had elected to receive mild treatment or other lumbar spine interventions by 2 years, precluding valid 2-year between-group comparisons. Neither group reported any device- or procedure-related adverse events.

CONCLUSIONS:

The durability of mild + CMM for this patient population was demonstrated for all efficacy outcomes through 2 years. Improvements in walking time from baseline to 2 years for patients treated with mild + CMM were significant and substantial. The lack of reported device or procedure-related adverse events reinforces the strong safety profile of the mild procedure. These results provide support for early interventional treatment of symptomatic LSS with the mild procedure.
Subject(s)
Key words

Full text: 1 Collection: 01-internacional Database: MEDLINE Main subject: Spinal Stenosis Type of study: Clinical_trials / Qualitative_research Aspects: Patient_preference Limits: Humans Language: En Journal: Pain Pract Journal subject: NEUROLOGIA / PSICOFISIOLOGIA Year: 2024 Document type: Article Affiliation country: United States

Full text: 1 Collection: 01-internacional Database: MEDLINE Main subject: Spinal Stenosis Type of study: Clinical_trials / Qualitative_research Aspects: Patient_preference Limits: Humans Language: En Journal: Pain Pract Journal subject: NEUROLOGIA / PSICOFISIOLOGIA Year: 2024 Document type: Article Affiliation country: United States