A Pivotal Study to Assess the InSpace™ Device for Treatment of Full Thickness Massive Rotator Cuff Tears

Not Applicable

Completed

Conditions: Rotator Cuff Syndrome

Interventions: Procedure: Partial repair of rotator cuff
Device: InSpace sub-acromial tissue spacer system

Registration Number: NCT02493660

Lead Sponsor: OrthoSpace Ltd.

Brief Summary: A pivotal study to assess the safety and effectiveness of the InSpace™ device implantation in comparison to surgical partial repair of full thickness Massive Rotator Cuff Tear (MRCT).

Detailed Description: This is a non-inferiority, prospective, single blinded, multi-center, randomized, controlled, pivotal study evaluating the safety and effectiveness of the InSpace™ device as a primary surgical treatment for full thickness MRCT in comparison to Partial Repair of a full thickness MRCT performed during an arthroscopic procedure.

Recruitment & Eligibility

Status: COMPLETED

Sex: All

Target Recruitment: 184

Inclusion Criteria

Positive diagnostic imaging by MRI of the index shoulder indicating a full thickness Massive Rotator Cuff Tear (MRCT), measuring ≥ 5 cm in diameter involving ≥ two tendons (confirmed Intra-operatively)
Functional deltoid muscle and preserved passive range of motion on physical examination
Documented VAS score of > 30 mm pain
Failed non-operative treatment of at least 4 months
Patient in general good health,independent, and can comply with all post-operative evaluations and visits.

Main

Exclusion Criteria

Known allergy to the device material (copolymer of PLA and -ε-caprolactone)
Evidence of the following conditions:
1. significant gleno-humeral or acromiohumeral arthritis
2. full thickness cartilage loss as seen on MRI
3. gleno-humeral instability (excessive translation of the humeral head on the glenoid fossa)
4. pre-existing deltoid defect or deltoid palsy
5. major joint trauma, infection or necrosis
6. partial thickness tears of the supraspinatous
7. fully reparable rotator cuff tear [Tear of less than 5 cm in diameter (or < 4 cm2) with retractable tendon that can be fully repaired]
The subject requires concomitant subscapularis repair and/or labral repair
Previous surgery of the index shoulder in the past 1 year, excluding diagnostic arthroscopy
The subject's condition is bilateral and rotator cuff repair is scheduled or to be scheduled over the course of this study for the contra lateral shoulder
Major medical condition that could affect quality of life and influence the results of the study (e.g. HIV or other immunosuppressive conditions, active malignancy in the past 5 years, acute MI, CVA, etc.)
Documented evidence of a history of drug/alcohol abuse within 12 months of enrollment
The subject's condition represents a worker's compensation case
The subject is currently involved in a health-related litigation procedure
Females of child-bearing potential who are pregnant or breastfeeding or plan to become pregnant during the course of the study
Concurrent participation in any other investigational clinical study one month prior to enrollment or during the entire study period
The subject has implanted metallic devices (e.g., cardiac pacemakers, insulin pumps, nerve stimulators), medically implanted clips or other electronically, magnetically or mechanically activated implants that would contraindicate undergoing a MRI scan or has claustrophobia that would inhibit ability to undergo a MRI scan .
The subject is physically or mentally compromised (e.g., currently being treated for a psychiatric disorder, senile dementia, Alzheimer's disease, etc.), to the extent that the Investigator judges the subject to be unable or unlikely to remain compliant to follow-up
The subject is receiving prescription narcotic pain medication for conditions unrelated to the index shoulder condition
The subject currently has an acute infection in the area surrounding the surgical site.

Study & Design

Study Type: INTERVENTIONAL

Study Design: PARALLEL

Arm && Interventions

Group	Intervention	Description
Tendon Repair	Partial repair of rotator cuff	Arthroscopic partial repair of rotator cuff
InSpace implantation	InSpace sub-acromial tissue spacer system	Arthroscopic InSpace (Sub-acromial tissue spacer system) implantation

Primary Outcome Measures

Name	Time	Method
Percentage of Participants in the Per Protocol Population With Surgical Treatment Success of the InSpace Device as a Primary Surgical Treatment for Full-thickness Massive Rotator Cuff Tears From Baseline to Month 12 With no SSSIs and no SADEs.	Baseline to month 12	The primary composite effectiveness endpoint was defined as achievement of improvement for the Western Ontario Rotator Cuff (WORC) score (≥275 points) and American Shoulder and Elbow Society (ASES) score (≥6.4 points) by week 6 and maintenance at month 12 without subsequent secondary surgical intervention (SSSI) or serious adverse device effects (SADEs). The improvement of points of the Western Ontario Rotator Cuff (WORC) of at least 275 (point scale of 0-2100:lower score is better) and American Shoulder and Elbow Society (ASES) at least 6.4 (point scale of 0-100:higher score is better) reflect the required number of points in improvement for treatment to be considered successful.

Secondary Outcome Measures

Name	Time	Method
Composite Endpoint of WORC Improvement ≥275 and ASES Improvement ≥6.4 at Week 6 Maintained at Month 24 no Subsequent Secondary Surgical Intervention (SSSI) and no Serious Adverse Device Effect (SADEs) (Pre-specified). Composite WORC ASES and Safety to M24	Baseline through to Month 24	Composite Endpoint Per Protocol Population (PP) of WORC Improvement ≥ 275 and ASES Improvement ≥ 6.4 from baseline at Week 6 Maintained at Month 24 with no Subsequent Secondary Surgical Intervention (SSSI) and no Serious Adverse Device Effect (SADEs) (pre-specified).
Mean Change From Baseline to Month 24 for VAS in the Intent To Treat (ITT) Population With Available Data With Surgical Treatment Success of the InSpace Device as a Primary Surgical Treatment for Full-thickness Massive Rotator Cuff Tears	Baseline through to month 24	The secondary effectiveness endpoint was defined as the mean change from baseline at Month 24 for Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) (scale of 0-100:lower score is better) in the two groups, InSpace and Partial Repair.
Mean Change From Baseline to Month 24 in the Intent To Treat (ITT) Population With Available Data With Surgical Treatment Success of the InSpace Device as a Primary Surgical Treatment for Full-thickness Massive Rotator Cuff Tears Through to Month 24. WORC	Baseline through to month 24	The secondary effectiveness endpoint was defined as mean change from baseline to Month 24 for Western Ontario Rotator Cuff (WORC) total score improvement (≥275) (scale of 0-2100:lower score is better) in the two groups, InSpace and Partial Repair.
Mean Change From Baseline to Month 24 in the Intent To Treat (ITT) Population With Available Data With Surgical Treatment Success of the InSpace Device as a Primary Surgical Treatment for Full-thickness Massive Rotator Cuff Tears Through to Month 24. ASES	Baseline through to month 24	Mean change in American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES) score from baseline to month 24. The improvement of points of the American Shoulder and Elbow Society (ASES) at least 6.4 (point scale of 0-100:higher score is better) reflect the required number of points in improvement for treatment to be considered successful.
Composite Endpoint Component Level Success for WORC at Month 12 Compared to Baseline in the Per Protocol Population (PP)	Baseline to month 12	The secondary effectiveness endpoint was defined as a composite component-level success at Month 12 for Western Ontario Rotator Cuff (WORC) total score improvement (≥275) (scale of 0-2100:lower score is better) in the two groups, InSpace and Partial Repair without subsequent secondary surgical intervention (SSSI) or serious adverse device effects (SADEs).
Composite Endpoint Component Level Success for ASES at Month 12 Compared to Baseline in the Per Protocol Population (PP)	Baseline to month 12	The secondary endpoint was defined as a composite component-level success for American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons ( ASES) compared at baseline to Month 12 without subsequent secondary surgical intervention (SSSI) or serious adverse device effects (SADEs).. The total score improvement of (≥ 6.4 points) (scale of 0-100:higher score is better) from baseline in the two groups, InSpace and Partial Repair.
Mean Change From Baseline to Month 24 for Constant-Murley (CS) in the Intent To Treat Population (ITT) With Available Data With Surgical Treatment Success of the InSpace Device as a Primary Surgical Treatment for Full-thickness Massive Rotator Cuff Tears	Baseline to month 24	The secondary effectiveness endpoint was defined as mean change from baseline to Month 24 for Constant-Murley (CS) Shoulder Outcome score (where the scale of 0-100:higher score is better) in the two groups, InSpace and Partial Repair.
The Mean Change From Baseline to Month 24 for EQ-5D-5L for Intent To Treat (ITT) Population With Available Data With Surgical Treatment Success of the InSpace Device as a Primary Surgical Treatment for Full-thickness Massive Rotator Cuff Tears	Baseline through to month 24	The secondary effectiveness endpoint was defined as change in baseline to Month 24 for Quality of Life (EQ-5D-5L) (scale of 0-100: lower score better) in the two groups, InSpace and Partial Repair.
Mean Change From Baseline to Month 24 for ASES ROM in the Intent To Treat (ITT) Population With Available Data With Surgical Treatment Success of the InSpace Device as a Primary Surgical Treatment for Full-thickness Massive Rotator Cuff Tears	Baseline through to month 24	The secondary effectiveness endpoint was defined as mean change from baseline at Month 24 for American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES) range of motion (ROM)-physician reported portion. (scale of 0-180 Degrees: higher score is better) in the two groups, InSpace and Partial Repair.

Trial Locations

Locations (21): Southern California Orthopedic Institute
🇺🇸
Van Nuys, California, United States
Tulane University School of Medicine
🇺🇸
New Orleans, Louisiana, United States
Rockford Orthopedic Associates
🇺🇸
Rockford, Illinois, United States
NYU
🇺🇸
New York, New York, United States
Columbia University Medical Center
🇺🇸
New York, New York, United States
University of Buffalo Buffalo
🇺🇸
New York, New York, United States
Fowler Kennedy Sport Medicine Clinic
🇨🇦
London, Ontario, Canada
Roth McFarlane Hand and Upper Limb Center
🇨🇦
London, Ontario, Canada
Ottawa Hospital Research Institute
🇨🇦
Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
Holy Cross Hospital
🇺🇸
Fort Lauderdale, Florida, United States
Upstate Orthopedics
🇺🇸
Syracuse, New York, United States
University Orthopedic Center
🇺🇸
State College, Pennsylvania, United States
University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center
🇺🇸
Dallas, Texas, United States
Midwest Orthopedics at RUSH
🇺🇸
Chicago, Illinois, United States
Brigham & Women's Hospital
🇺🇸
Boston, Massachusetts, United States
Johns Hopkins
🇺🇸
Baltimore, Maryland, United States
MedStar Union Memorial Orthopaedics
🇺🇸
Baltimore, Maryland, United States
Rothman Institute
🇺🇸
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, United States
The Ohio State University
🇺🇸
Ohio City, Ohio, United States
University of Colorado
🇺🇸
Denver, Colorado, United States
Cincinnati SportsMedicine and Orthopaedic Center - Mercy Health
🇺🇸
Cincinnati, Ohio, United States