Outcomes in Rotator Cuff Repair Using Graft Reinforcement
|ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01025037|
Recruitment Status : Completed
First Posted : December 3, 2009
Results First Posted : January 26, 2015
Last Update Posted : January 26, 2015
|Condition or disease||Intervention/treatment||Phase|
|Rotator Cuff Tear||Device: Conexa Reconstructive Tissue Matrix||Not Applicable|
|Study Type :||Interventional (Clinical Trial)|
|Actual Enrollment :||61 participants|
|Intervention Model:||Single Group Assignment|
|Masking:||None (Open Label)|
|Official Title:||A Prospective, Multi-Center, Single-Arm Study to Assess Clinical Outcomes In Primary Open or Mini-Open Rotator Cuff Repair Using Conexa Graft Reinforcement|
|Study Start Date :||October 2009|
|Actual Primary Completion Date :||February 2014|
|Actual Study Completion Date :||April 2014|
Conexa Reconstructive Tissue Matrix
Conexa will be placed as a soft tissue reinforcement at the rotator cuff repair site
Device: Conexa Reconstructive Tissue Matrix
Conexa will be placed as a soft tissue reinforcement in primary open or mini-open rotator cuff repair procedures
Other Name: Conexa, Conexa TM
- American Shoulder and Elbow Score (ASES) [ Time Frame: baseline, post-op months 3, 6, 12, and 24 ]The ASES evaluation generally has a patient self-evaluation section and a physician assessment section. The patient self-evaluation section of the form contains visual analog scales for pain, instability, an activities of daily living (ADL) questionnaire. The physician assessment section includes an area to collect demographic information and assesses range of motion, specific physical signs, strength, and stability. A shoulder score can be derived from the visual analogue scale score for pain (50%) and the cumulative activities of daily living score (50%) (Richards, Bigliani, Gartsman, Iannotti, & Zuckerman, 1994). The ASES evaluation has a total of 100 points possible; with 100 being the best possible outcome, and 0 being the worst.
- Adjusted Constant-Murley Score [ Time Frame: baseline, post-op months 6, 12, and 24 ]The Constant-Murley Shoulder Score is a 100-point functional shoulder assessment tool in which higher scores reflect increased function. The subjective variables are pain (15 points) and function (Activities of Daily Living - sleep, work, recreation/sport) (20 points), for a total of 35 points. The objective variables are active range of motion (clinician assessment) (40 points) and strength (25 points), for a total of 65 points (Stiller & Uhl, 2005).
- Simple Shoulder Test (SST) [ Time Frame: baseline, post-op months 3, 6, 12, and 24 ]The Simple Shoulder Test (SST): a series of 12 "yes" or "no" questions the patient answers about the function of the involved shoulder; 2 questions relate to pain, 7 questions relate to function and 3 questions relate to range of motion. The answers to these questions (yes = 1, no = 0) provides a standardized way of recording the function of a shoulder before and after treatment (McClure & Michener, 2003). A score of 12 on the Simple Shoulder test represents the best possible outcome, while a score of 0 represents the worst possible outcome.
- Rotator Cuff Re-tear Evaluation [ Time Frame: Post-op months 6 and 12 ]
Subjects will have MRI to assess healing of the repaired tendon at 6 and 12 months post-op. The rate of re-tear will be reported.
Two different definitions of a re-tear were used for the analysis.
- Primary definition (used for analysis of the secondary objective): Full thickness tear that is 80% or greater in length of the original tear size.
- Sub-analysis: Full thickness tear one centimeter or greater in length.
- Isometric Strength [ Time Frame: baseline, post-op months 6, 12, and 24 ]
- Incidence of Complications, Including Infection [ Time Frame: All time points ]Complications were summarized by reporting adverse events of special interest. AEs of special interest were defined as any reported infection (incision, wound, surgical site), seroma, hematoma, inflammation (surgical site, wound), and re-tear. The re-tear rate reported in this section is the number reported via AE or surgical intervention (not the MRI results). The AEs of special interest were chosen because they are in alignment with the potential complications listed on the product insert.
Please refer to this study by its ClinicalTrials.gov identifier (NCT number): NCT01025037
|United States, Arizona|
|Orthopaedic Clinical Association|
|Phoenix, Arizona, United States, 85016|
|United States, Illinois|
|Rush University Medical Center|
|Chicago, Illinois, United States, 60612|
|United States, North Carolina|
|Duke University Medical Center|
|Durham, North Carolina, United States, 27710|
|United States, Ohio|
|New Albany, Ohio, United States, 43054|
|United States, Pennsylvania|
|Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, United States, 19107|
|United States, West Virginia|
|West Virginia University|
|Morgantown, West Virginia, United States, 26506|
|Study Director:||Joseph Iannotti, MD||Cleveland, OH|
|Study Director:||John Sperling, MD||Rochester, MN|