Lumbar Spinal StenosisNCT07588555
Comparative Analysis of Two Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion (TLIF) Procedures in the Treatment of Single-Level Lumbar Spinal Stenosis (LSS): A Single-Center, Prospective, Randomized Controlled Trial
A study testing LUSE-TLIF and MIS-TLIF in people with Lumbar Spinal Stenosis, run by The Third Affiliated Hospital of Southern Medical University at 1 site in China.
Trial summary
Lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS), a common degenerative lumbar condition characterized by low back pain, leg pain, and neurogenic claudication, significantly impairs patients' quality of life. Its prevalence continues to rise with the aging population. Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages 40 to 70 years
- Conditions the study is for
- Lumbar Spinal Stenosis
- What is being tested?
- LUSE-TLIF and MIS-TLIF
- Type of treatment
- Surgery or procedure
- Could I receive a placebo?
- No, everyone receives an active treatment
- How many people
- 276 participants
- Where
- 1 siteChina
- Study dates
- 18 Mar 2026to 31 Dec 2031
- Phase
- Interventional
- Are there results?
- Not yet: the study is under way
Key requirements
Who can take part, as listed by the sponsor. Only the study team can confirm whether you are eligible, so take this list to your doctor.
- Ages 40 to 70 years
- All sexes
- No healthy volunteers
- Adult, Older adult
Who may be able to join
- Age ranging from 40 to 70 years, irrespective of sex.
- Presence of bilateral lower-limb pain and neurogenic claudication, with or without low back pain.
- Preoperative computed tomography or magnetic resonance imaging confirming single-level lumbar spinal stenosis accompanied by grade II or higher lumbar spondylolisthesis and/or lumbar instability.
- Persistent pain within 7 days prior to enrollment, with inadequate response to nonsurgical treatment for more than 3 months.
- Willingness to provide written informed consent and ability to comply with the study protocol and visit schedule.
Who cannot join
- Patients with evidence of vascular claudication identified by lower-limb color Doppler ultrasound.
- Patients with a history of previous lumbar spine surgery.
- Coexistence of severe lumbar disc herniation, spinal deformity, spinal tumor, infection, or inflammatory diseases.
- Pregnancy or lactation.
- Presence of severe underlying medical conditions or psychiatric disorders that preclude tolerance of the procedure.
- Known concurrent diseases considered by the investigator to preclude study entry.
- Inability to comply with study assessments or complete questionnaires for any reason.
- Patients deemed unsuitable for participation in this trial as judged by the investigator.
Trial locations and contacts
1 site in 1 country. Contact the study team or a site near you to ask about taking part.
China1 site, 1 recruiting
- Recruiting
The Third Affiliated Hospital of Southern Medical University
Guangzhou, Guangdong, 515000
Kaiting Chen, PhD, +86 020-62784332, 1190011049@smu.edu.cn
About this study
Official title: Comparative Analysis of L-Unitary Soft Endoscope Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion (LUSE-TLIF) Versus Minimally Invasive Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion (MIS-TLIF) in the Treatment of Single-Level Lumbar Spinal Stenosis (LSS): A Single-Center, Prospective, Randomized Controlled Trial
Lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS), a common degenerative lumbar condition characterized by low back pain, leg pain, and neurogenic claudication, significantly impairs patients' quality of life. Its prevalence continues to rise with the aging population. For patients who do not respond to conservative treatment, surgical intervention remains a key therapeutic approach, with lumbar interbody fusion (LIF) being a commonly employed procedure. The technique has evolved from posterior lumbar interbody fusion (PLIF) to transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) and, more recently, to minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (MIS-TLIF). Although MIS-TLIF can effectively reduce tissue trauma and complications, it still faces clinical challenges such as intraoperative visual blind spots and the potential for postoperative chronic back pain associated with reliance on conventional pedicle screws. To address these limitations, our research team independently developed a highly integrated, miniaturized (with an outer diameter of only 1.8 mm), and maneuverable L-Unitary Soft Endoscope (LUSE) minimally invasive system. Its unique design helps avoid obstruction of the surgical field and allows flexible adjustment during the procedure. Currently, there is a lack of clinical efficacy evaluations in China on the use of this LUSE system for TLIF surgery (referred to as LUSE-TLIF) in treating LSS. Therefore, this study aims to systematically compare LUSE-TLIF with the currently mainstream MIS-TLIF, evaluating its safety, efficacy, and clinical outcomes in the treatment of LSS, in order to provide spine surgeons with a novel and potentially superior minimally invasive surgical option.
Read the detailed description
Lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS) is a common degenerative condition of the lumbar spine. In its narrow definition, LSS primarily refers to central canal stenosis resulting from facet joint hypertrophy and thickening of the ligamentum flavum. Broadly, it also encompasses lateral recess stenosis and bony stenosis within the intervertebral foramen region, categories that some scholars group under lateral canal stenosis. The main symptoms of LSS include low back pain, leg pain, and neurogenic claudication, which impair patients' quality of life and severely limit function, particularly in the elderly. With the aging global population, the prevalence of LSS is rising, affecting approximately 103 million patients worldwide. Treatment options for LSS include both conservative and surgical management. Conservative treatments encompass medication, physical therapy, and lifestyle modifications. However, surgical intervention may be necessary for LSS patients who do not respond adequately to conservative therapies.
Lumbar interbody fusion (LIF) is commonly employed to treat various spinal pathologies, particularly lumbar spinal stenosis. Currently, LIF can be performed via open or minimally invasive approaches, including transforaminal, posterior, anterior, and lateral routes, each with its own advantages and disadvantages. Generally, posterior lumbar interbody fusion (PLIF) is a well-established procedure associated with good fusion rates and relatively low complication rates. However, it carries the risk of iatrogenic injury to neural structures and paraspinal muscles. Despite demonstrating favorable early outcomes, PLIF has notable limitations, including a relatively high complication rate and a challenging recovery process. In 1982, transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) was introduced, which offers a less traumatic and safer unilateral interbody fusion technique. TLIF addresses several shortcomings of PLIF, leading to its rapid adoption and continuous refinement within the spine surgery community. Nevertheless, traditional open TLIF faces challenges such as significant tissue trauma, potential muscle atrophy, chronic postoperative low back pain, and adjacent segment instability.
The advent of various minimally invasive techniques has helped reduce muscle injury and irritation to the posterior spinal elements. To minimize surgical trauma and facilitate rapid recovery, minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (MIS-TLIF) was developed. A meta-analysis published in 2017 reported that MIS-TLIF could lower postoperative complication rates compared to conventional open procedures. Furthermore, MIS-TLIF demonstrates significant efficacy in protecting muscles (e.g., the multifidus) and ligaments. A comparative study indicated that the rates of postoperative complications and reoperations at 2-year and 3-year follow-ups were significantly lower for MIS-TLIF than for traditional TLIF. However, despite the improved visualization provided by the endoscope in MIS-TLIF, visual blind spots may still exist in certain complex anatomical areas, potentially leading to incomplete assessment of the pathological site and suboptimal placement of internal fixation devices. Additionally, MIS-TLIF relies on traditional open pedicle screw fixation, which may increase the long-term risk of postoperative chronic low back pain.
To address the aforementioned clinical challenges, our research team independently developed a L-Unitary Soft Endoscope minimally invasive system, termed LUSE (Chinese National Invention Patent: CN117017466B). It completed filing as a Class I medical device with the Guangzhou Market Supervision Administration in 2021 (Filing No.: 20210598) and is classified as a set of fundamental orthopedic surgical instruments, with its filing status remaining valid. The system features a highly integrated, all-in-one design that combines key components such as the display, camera, light source, and transmission system into a single unit, simplifying operation and maintenance. During development, particular attention was paid to controlling the size and weight of the endoscope, resulting in a compact and lightweight soft endoscope with a diameter of 1.8 mm and a length of 2-4 cm. Its volume and weight are reduced by approximately 93% compared to traditional endoscopes. This endoscope integrates multiple functions including illumination, imaging, and recording, significantly enhancing procedural convenience and patient comfort.
Compared to the traditional MIS-TLIF performed under a Quadrant expandable retractor system, the highly integrated LUSE system offers several advantages in lumbar minimally invasive fusion surgery: (1) The LUSE system supports 8K ultra-high-definition imaging, providing clear and detailed visualization of the surgical field, whereas the Quadrant retractor system only provides illumination without endoscopic magnification, limiting the ability to visualize fine anatomical structures; (2) LUSE-TLIF utilizes a percutaneous pedicle screw system, minimizing injury to the lumbar back muscles, ligaments, and blood vessels. In contrast, MIS-TLIF requires the placement of pedicle screws via a traditional open approach, which may increase the long-term incidence of chronic back pain; (3) The soft lens of the LUSE system offers 360-degree flexibility, whereas the Quadrant retractor system has inherent visual blind spots that can hinder adequate decompression and optimal implant placement. Therefore, LUSE-TLIF holds multiple advantages over MIS-TLIF. Our team has previously demonstrated the safety and efficacy of the LUSE system in anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) and artificial disc replacement (ADR) procedures, with related studies published in leading Chinese journals such as the Chinese Journal of Orthopaedicsand the Chinese Journal of Spine and Spinal Cord. However, there is currently a lack of clinical research in China evaluating the efficacy of LUSE-TLIF for treating LSS. Consequently, this study aims to apply LUSE-TLIF for LSS treatment, observe its safety, efficacy, and clinical outcomes, and conduct a comparative analysis with MIS-TLIF, with the goal of providing spine surgeons with an additional and potentially superior surgical option.
- Conditions
- Lumbar Spinal Stenosis
- Being tested
- LUSE-TLIF, MIS-TLIF
- Keywords
- Lumbar spinal stenosis, LUSE-TLIF, MISTLIF, Lumbar Spondylolisthesis, Lumbar Instability
- Medical subject headings
- Spinal Stenosis, Spondylolisthesis
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
LUSE-TLIFProcedure or surgery
Also called Experimental Group, 01
LUSE-TLIF is a TLIF procedure performed through the LUSE system.
MIS-TLIFProcedure or surgery
Also called Control group, 02
MIS-TLIF is a TLIF procedure performed through the Quadrant channel and other systems.
| Study group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| LUSE-TLIF | Experimental | The subject underwent LUSE-TLIF surgery Receives: Procedure: LUSE-TLIF |
| MIS-TLIF | Active comparator | Subjects underwent MIS-TLIF surgery assisted by the Quadrant channel Receives: Procedure: MIS-TLIF |
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
Vertebral Fushion
Assess vertebral fusion status through imaging indicators and clinical symptoms. Vertebral fusion was established as the clinical outcome, defined as: (1) Clinical fusion: a. absence of mechanical low back pain and intermittent claudication; b. dynamic flexion-extension radiographs demonstrating motion angle of the surgical segment less than 4°; (2) Bony fusion: a. Bridwell grade A or B; b. increase in segmental lordosis angle of the surgical segment ≥3° compared to baseline; (3) simultaneous achievement of both clinical and bony fusion.
Measured: 3-month, 6-month, 1-year, 2-year, 3-year, 5-year post-operation
ODI
The ODI score refers to the Oswestry Disability Index, a widely used questionnaire that measures the level of disability in individuals with low back pain. It consists of ten sections assessing daily activities, with scores ranging from 0 to 100; higher scores indicate more severe disability.
Measured: baseline, 3-day, 3-month, 6-month, 1-year, 2-year, 3-year, 5-year post-operation
Secondary outcomes (10)
VAS
The VAS score refers to the Visual Analogue Scale, a tool used to measure leg and back pain intensity. Patients mark a point on a 10-cm line, where one end represents "no pain" (0) and the other "worst imaginable pain" (10). The distance from the zero point gives the score, providing a simple, quick measure of symptom severity.
Measured: baseline, 3-day, 3-month, 6-month, 1-year, 2-year, 3-year, 5-year post-operation
Surgery time
The surgery duration is recorded according to the time in the surgical document, with the unit in minutes.
Measured: within 24 hours after surgery
Total blood loss
Collect the patient's height (m), weight (kg), hematocrit levels one day before and one day after surgery, and calculate the total blood loss (mL) using the Gross equation and Nadler formula.
Measured: within 24 hours after surgery
postoperative drainage volume
The total drainage volume (mL) will be recorded by a ward nurse who is unaware of the study
Measured: Within 24 hours after the subject is discharged
incision length
The incision length (cm) will be measured by a surgical nurse who is unaware of the study.
Measured: Within 24 hours after surgery
surgical costs
Hospitalization costs (yuan/¥) will be calculated by a nurse who is unaware of the study, based on hospital system records.
Measured: Within 24 hours after the subject is discharged
intraoperative blood loss
Intraoperative blood loss was recorded by a nurse who was unaware of this study, including blood in the drains and in the gauze, measured in mL.
Measured: within 24 hours after surgery
Other lumbar spine imaging indicators
Measurement of dural sac cross-sectional area, lumbar spondylolisthesis rate, Cobb angle, average intervertebral disc height, and other parameters using X-ray, CT, and MRI.
Measured: baseline, 3-day, 3-month, 6-month, 1-year, 2-year, 3-year, 5-year post-operation
Condition of paraspinal muscles
MRI measures paraspinal muscle area and fat infiltration rate by analyzing cross-sectional images from the lumbar spine.
Measured: baseline, 3-month, 6-month, 1-year, 2-year, 3-year, 5-year post-operation
Muscle injury
CK (creatine kinase) and CK-MB are blood biomarkers used to assess muscle damage after lumbar fusion surgery
Measured: 1 day before surgery, 1 day and 3 days after surgery
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted14 May 2026
- Study start18 Mar 2026
- Primary completion31 Dec 2031 (estimated)
- Study completion31 Dec 2031 (estimated)
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Other trials for Lumbar Spinal StenosisStudies of the same condition, open and under way.
- What the trial phases meanHow a treatment moves from first tests in people to approval.
More details
For doctors and researchers: how the study is designed, who runs it, and its registry IDs.
Study design
- Study type
- Interventional
- Phase
- Phase N/A
- Primary purpose
- Treatment
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Model description
- This is a prospective, single-center, randomized, controlled clinical trial. Patients with lumbar spinal stenosis were screened according to the predefined inclusion and exclusion criteria and enrolled after providing written informed consent. Eligible participants were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to either the LUSE-TLIF group or the MIS-TLIF group by a study nurse (who was not involved in patient recruitment, intervention delivery, or outcome assessment) using a computer-generated randomization scheme. Patients in the two groups underwent LUSE-TLIF or MIS-TLIF, respectively. General patient characteristics, perioperative data, radiographic parameters, and postoperative complications were recorded. The efficacy and safety of the two approaches were subsequently evaluated.
- Masking
- Triple blind
- Who is masked
- Care provider, Investigator, Outcomes assessor
- Enrolment
- 276 participants (estimated)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- The Third Affiliated Hospital of Southern Medical University
- Sponsor type
- Other government
- Responsible party
- Principal investigator, Qingchu Li, The Third Affiliated Hospital of Southern Medical University
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT07588555
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- LUSETLIFvsMISTLIF
- Other IDs
- MR-44-26-026507
- Status last verified
- Mar 2026
- First submitted
- 24 Apr 2026
- Last updated
- 14 May 2026
- Results posted
- No
- Data monitoring committee
- Yes
- FDA-regulated drug
- No
- FDA-regulated device
- No
- Individual data sharing
- Yes: Study Protocol, Statistical Analysis Plan, Informed Consent Form
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 14 May 2026. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- Comparative Analysis of L-Unitary Soft Endoscope Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion (LUSE-TLIF) Versus Minimally Invasive Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion (MIS-TLIF) in the Treatment of Single-Level Lumbar Spinal Stenosis (LSS): A Single-Center, Prospective, Randomized Controlled Trial
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT07588555
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- LUSETLIFvsMISTLIF
- Conditions
- Lumbar Spinal Stenosis
- Keywords
- Lumbar spinal stenosis, LUSE-TLIF, MISTLIF, Lumbar Spondylolisthesis, Lumbar Instability
- Study type
- Interventional
- Recruitment status
- Recruiting
- Enrolment
- 276 participants (estimated)
- Lead sponsor
- The Third Affiliated Hospital of Southern Medical UniversityOther government
- Study start
- 18 Mar 2026 (actual)
- Primary completion
- 31 Dec 2031 (estimated)
- Study completion
- 31 Dec 2031 (estimated)
- First posted
- 14 May 2026 (actual)
- Results
- Not posted in the source record
Clinical summary
The research question as the sponsor registered it. This describes what the study plans to test, not what it found.
Lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS), a common degenerative lumbar condition characterized by low back pain, leg pain, and neurogenic claudication, significantly impairs patients' quality of life. Its prevalence continues to rise with the aging population. For patients who do not respond to conservative treatment, surgical intervention remains a key therapeutic approach, with lumbar interbody fusion (LIF) being a commonly employed procedure. The technique has evolved from posterior lumbar interbody fusion (PLIF) to transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) and, more recently, to minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (MIS-TLIF). Although MIS-TLIF can effectively reduce tissue trauma and complications, it still faces clinical challenges such as intraoperative visual blind spots and the potential for postoperative chronic back pain associated with reliance on conventional pedicle screws. To address these limitations, our research team independently developed a highly integrated, miniaturized (with an outer diameter of only 1.8 mm), and maneuverable L-Unitary Soft Endoscope (LUSE) minimally invasive system. Its unique design helps avoid obstruction of the surgical field and allows flexible adjustment during the procedure. Currently, there is a lack of clinical efficacy evaluations in China on the use of this LUSE system for TLIF surgery (referred to as LUSE-TLIF) in treating LSS. Therefore, this study aims to systematically compare LUSE-TLIF with the currently mainstream MIS-TLIF, evaluating its safety, efficacy, and clinical outcomes in the treatment of LSS, in order to provide spine surgeons with a novel and potentially superior minimally invasive surgical option.
Detailed description
Lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS) is a common degenerative condition of the lumbar spine. In its narrow definition, LSS primarily refers to central canal stenosis resulting from facet joint hypertrophy and thickening of the ligamentum flavum. Broadly, it also encompasses lateral recess stenosis and bony stenosis within the intervertebral foramen region, categories that some scholars group under lateral canal stenosis. The main symptoms of LSS include low back pain, leg pain, and neurogenic claudication, which impair patients' quality of life and severely limit function, particularly in the elderly. With the aging global population, the prevalence of LSS is rising, affecting approximately 103 million patients worldwide. Treatment options for LSS include both conservative and surgical management. Conservative treatments encompass medication, physical therapy, and lifestyle modifications. However, surgical intervention may be necessary for LSS patients who do not respond adequately to conservative therapies.
Lumbar interbody fusion (LIF) is commonly employed to treat various spinal pathologies, particularly lumbar spinal stenosis. Currently, LIF can be performed via open or minimally invasive approaches, including transforaminal, posterior, anterior, and lateral routes, each with its own advantages and disadvantages. Generally, posterior lumbar interbody fusion (PLIF) is a well-established procedure associated with good fusion rates and relatively low complication rates. However, it carries the risk of iatrogenic injury to neural structures and paraspinal muscles. Despite demonstrating favorable early outcomes, PLIF has notable limitations, including a relatively high complication rate and a challenging recovery process. In 1982, transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) was introduced, which offers a less traumatic and safer unilateral interbody fusion technique. TLIF addresses several shortcomings of PLIF, leading to its rapid adoption and continuous refinement within the spine surgery community. Nevertheless, traditional open TLIF faces challenges such as significant tissue trauma, potential muscle atrophy, chronic postoperative low back pain, and adjacent segment instability.
The advent of various minimally invasive techniques has helped reduce muscle injury and irritation to the posterior spinal elements. To minimize surgical trauma and facilitate rapid recovery, minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (MIS-TLIF) was developed. A meta-analysis published in 2017 reported that MIS-TLIF could lower postoperative complication rates compared to conventional open procedures. Furthermore, MIS-TLIF demonstrates significant efficacy in protecting muscles (e.g., the multifidus) and ligaments. A comparative study indicated that the rates of postoperative complications and reoperations at 2-year and 3-year follow-ups were significantly lower for MIS-TLIF than for traditional TLIF. However, despite the improved visualization provided by the endoscope in MIS-TLIF, visual blind spots may still exist in certain complex anatomical areas, potentially leading to incomplete assessment of the pathological site and suboptimal placement of internal fixation devices. Additionally, MIS-TLIF relies on traditional open pedicle screw fixation, which may increase the long-term risk of postoperative chronic low back pain.
To address the aforementioned clinical challenges, our research team independently developed a L-Unitary Soft Endoscope minimally invasive system, termed LUSE (Chinese National Invention Patent: CN117017466B). It completed filing as a Class I medical device with the Guangzhou Market Supervision Administration in 2021 (Filing No.: 20210598) and is classified as a set of fundamental orthopedic surgical instruments, with its filing status remaining valid. The system features a highly integrated, all-in-one design that combines key components such as the display, camera, light source, and transmission system into a single unit, simplifying operation and maintenance. During development, particular attention was paid to controlling the size and weight of the endoscope, resulting in a compact and lightweight soft endoscope with a diameter of 1.8 mm and a length of 2-4 cm. Its volume and weight are reduced by approximately 93% compared to traditional endoscopes. This endoscope integrates multiple functions including illumination, imaging, and recording, significantly enhancing procedural convenience and patient comfort.
Compared to the traditional MIS-TLIF performed under a Quadrant expandable retractor system, the highly integrated LUSE system offers several advantages in lumbar minimally invasive fusion surgery: (1) The LUSE system supports 8K ultra-high-definition imaging, providing clear and detailed visualization of the surgical field, whereas the Quadrant retractor system only provides illumination without endoscopic magnification, limiting the ability to visualize fine anatomical structures; (2) LUSE-TLIF utilizes a percutaneous pedicle screw system, minimizing injury to the lumbar back muscles, ligaments, and blood vessels. In contrast, MIS-TLIF requires the placement of pedicle screws via a traditional open approach, which may increase the long-term incidence of chronic back pain; (3) The soft lens of the LUSE system offers 360-degree flexibility, whereas the Quadrant retractor system has inherent visual blind spots that can hinder adequate decompression and optimal implant placement. Therefore, LUSE-TLIF holds multiple advantages over MIS-TLIF. Our team has previously demonstrated the safety and efficacy of the LUSE system in anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) and artificial disc replacement (ADR) procedures, with related studies published in leading Chinese journals such as the Chinese Journal of Orthopaedicsand the Chinese Journal of Spine and Spinal Cord. However, there is currently a lack of clinical research in China evaluating the efficacy of LUSE-TLIF for treating LSS. Consequently, this study aims to apply LUSE-TLIF for LSS treatment, observe its safety, efficacy, and clinical outcomes, and conduct a comparative analysis with MIS-TLIF, with the goal of providing spine surgeons with an additional and potentially superior surgical option.
Study design
- Primary purpose
- Treatment
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- Triple blind (care provider, investigator, outcomes assessor)
- Number of arms
- 2
- Model description
- This is a prospective, single-center, randomized, controlled clinical trial. Patients with lumbar spinal stenosis were screened according to the predefined inclusion and exclusion criteria and enrolled after providing written informed consent. Eligible participants were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to either the LUSE-TLIF group or the MIS-TLIF group by a study nurse (who was not involved in patient recruitment, intervention delivery, or outcome assessment) using a computer-generated randomization scheme. Patients in the two groups underwent LUSE-TLIF or MIS-TLIF, respectively. General patient characteristics, perioperative data, radiographic parameters, and postoperative complications were recorded. The efficacy and safety of the two approaches were subsequently evaluated.
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| LUSE-TLIF | Experimental | Procedure: LUSE-TLIFThe subject underwent LUSE-TLIF surgery |
| MIS-TLIF | Active comparator | Procedure: MIS-TLIFSubjects underwent MIS-TLIF surgery assisted by the Quadrant channel |
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 40 to 70 years
- Sex
- All
- Healthy volunteers
- Not accepted
- Age groups
- Adult, Older adult
Key inclusion criteria (5 listed)
- Age ranging from 40 to 70 years, irrespective of sex.
- Presence of bilateral lower-limb pain and neurogenic claudication, with or without low back pain.
- Preoperative computed tomography or magnetic resonance imaging confirming single-level lumbar spinal stenosis accompanied by grade II or higher lumbar spondylolisthesis and/or lumbar instability.
- Persistent pain within 7 days prior to enrollment, with inadequate response to nonsurgical treatment for more than 3 months.
- Willingness to provide written informed consent and ability to comply with the study protocol and visit schedule.
Key exclusion criteria (8 listed)
- Patients with evidence of vascular claudication identified by lower-limb color Doppler ultrasound.
- Patients with a history of previous lumbar spine surgery.
- Coexistence of severe lumbar disc herniation, spinal deformity, spinal tumor, infection, or inflammatory diseases.
- Pregnancy or lactation.
- Presence of severe underlying medical conditions or psychiatric disorders that preclude tolerance of the procedure.
Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening; this overview does not establish that a patient qualifies. Full inclusion and exclusion criteria.
Interventions
| Intervention | Type | Arms |
|---|---|---|
| LUSE-TLIFAlso: Experimental Group, 01LUSE-TLIF is a TLIF procedure performed through the LUSE system. | Procedure or surgery | LUSE-TLIF |
| MIS-TLIFAlso: Control group, 02MIS-TLIF is a TLIF procedure performed through the Quadrant channel and other systems. | Procedure or surgery | MIS-TLIF |
Primary outcome
Vertebral Fushion
Time frame: 3-month, 6-month, 1-year, 2-year, 3-year, 5-year post-operation
Assess vertebral fusion status through imaging indicators and clinical symptoms. Vertebral fusion was established as the clinical outcome, defined as: (1) Clinical fusion: a. absence of mechanical low back pain and intermittent claudication; b. dynamic flexion-extension radiographs demonstrating motion angle of the surgical segment less than 4°; (2) Bony fusion: a. Bridwell grade A or B; b. increase in segmental lordosis angle of the surgical segment ≥3° compared to baseline; (3) simultaneous achievement of both clinical and bony fusion.
ODI
Time frame: baseline, 3-day, 3-month, 6-month, 1-year, 2-year, 3-year, 5-year post-operation
The ODI score refers to the Oswestry Disability Index, a widely used questionnaire that measures the level of disability in individuals with low back pain. It consists of ten sections assessing daily activities, with scores ranging from 0 to 100; higher scores indicate more severe disability.
10 secondary outcomes
VAS
Time frame: baseline, 3-day, 3-month, 6-month, 1-year, 2-year, 3-year, 5-year post-operation
Surgery time
Time frame: within 24 hours after surgery
Total blood loss
Time frame: within 24 hours after surgery
postoperative drainage volume
Time frame: Within 24 hours after the subject is discharged
incision length
Time frame: Within 24 hours after surgery
surgical costs
Time frame: Within 24 hours after the subject is discharged
intraoperative blood loss
Time frame: within 24 hours after surgery
Other lumbar spine imaging indicators
Time frame: baseline, 3-day, 3-month, 6-month, 1-year, 2-year, 3-year, 5-year post-operation
Condition of paraspinal muscles
Time frame: baseline, 3-month, 6-month, 1-year, 2-year, 3-year, 5-year post-operation
Muscle injury
Time frame: 1 day before surgery, 1 day and 3 days after surgery
Results and safety
This study is still under way. Results are not available in the source record yet.
Research links
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govLast updated by the sponsor 14 May 2026.
- Individual participant dataSharing planned: Yes. Study Protocol, Statistical Analysis Plan, Informed Consent Form
Related trials for Lumbar Spinal Stenosis
Not yet recruitingObservational study
Foraminal Imaging and Symptoms in Single-Level Degenerative Lumbar Stenosis
Degenerative Lumbar Spinal Stenosis, Lumbar Foraminal Stenosis
Recruiting
Post-Market Clinical Study of Functional Motion Outcomes in Subjects Treated With the Minuteman Device
Degenerative Conditions of the Lumbar Spine, Lumbar Spinal Stenosis
RecruitingObservational study
MILD® Percutaneous Image-Guided Lumbar Decompression: A Medicare Claims Study
Lumbar Spinal Stenosis
RecruitingObservational study
Thoracic-Lumbar Arthrodesis- Implanet Jazz
Spondylolisthesis, Spinal Stenosis
Recruiting
Surgical Treatment of Adjacent Segment Stenosis
Adjacent Segment Disease, Lumbar Spinal Stenosis
Referral and contact
AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals. Contact the study team or a site listed below; they decide who can take part.
1 site in 1 country: see every site and its status.
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
A study testing LUSE-TLIF and MIS-TLIF in people with Lumbar Spinal Stenosis, run by The Third Affiliated Hospital of Southern Medical University at 1 site in China.
The full registered description is in the About this study section and the official record.
Who may be eligible to take part?
The sponsor lists 5 inclusion and 8 exclusion criteria. Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening, so read the full criteria and contact a listed site.
Is this clinical trial currently recruiting?
The record says: looking for participants now, as of the sponsor's last update on 14 May 2026. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.
Where is the study taking place?
The record lists 1 site in China. Whether a site is taking part right now should be confirmed with that site. See every site.
What are the possible benefits and risks?
They depend on the study and the treatment, and no study can promise a benefit. The study team explains the known risks during informed consent, before anyone joins; the record itself does not list them.
Are results available for this study?
This study is still under way. Results are not available in the source record yet.
How can a doctor refer a patient or contact the research team?
Contact Kaiting Chen, PhD (+86 020-62784332, 1190011049@smu.edu.cn), or a site near the patient. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.
What does the primary outcome measure?
Vertebral Fushion (time frame: 3-month, 6-month, 1-year, 2-year, 3-year, 5-year post-operation). The study lists 2 primary outcomes in all. It is what the study was designed to measure, not a finding.
Where can I read the original study information?
Does a listing mean the treatment is approved or proven to work?
No. A listing means the study is registered. It does not show that the treatment is safe, works, or is approved by a regulator.
How often is this information updated?
AzTrials copies changed records from ClinicalTrials.gov every night and reloads the whole registry every week. The sponsor last updated this record on 14 May 2026.