4.6 Article

Targeting patient recovery priorities in degenerative cervical myelopathy: design and rationale for the RECEDE-Myelopathy trial-study protocol

期刊

BMJ OPEN
卷 13, 期 3, 页码 -

出版社

BMJ PUBLISHING GROUP
DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2022-061294

关键词

neurosurgery; spine

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study aims to test the disease-modulating activity of the phosphodiesterase 3/phosphodiesterase 4 inhibitor Ibudilast as an adjuvant to surgical decompression in Degenerative cervical myelopathy (DCM). It is a multicentre, double-blind, randomised, placebo-controlled trial. The primary endpoints are pain and physical function measured at 6 months after surgery.
Introduction Degenerative cervical myelopathy (DCM) is a common and disabling condition of symptomatic cervical spinal cord compression secondary to degenerative changes in spinal structures leading to a mechanical stress injury of the spinal cord. RECEDE-Myelopathy aims to test the disease-modulating activity of the phosphodiesterase 3/phosphodiesterase 4 inhibitor Ibudilast as an adjuvant to surgical decompression in DCM.Methods and analysis RECEDE-Myelopathy is a multicentre, double-blind, randomised, placebo-controlled trial. Participants will be randomised to receive either 60-100 mg Ibudilast or placebo starting within 10 weeks prior to surgery and continuing for 24 weeks after surgery for a maximum of 34 weeks. Adults with DCM, who have a modified Japanese Orthopaedic Association (mJOA) score 8-14 inclusive and are scheduled for their first decompressive surgery are eligible for inclusion. The coprimary endpoints are pain measured on a visual analogue scale and physical function measured by the mJOA score at 6 months after surgery. Clinical assessments will be undertaken preoperatively, postoperatively and 3, 6 and 12 months after surgery. We hypothesise that adjuvant therapy with Ibudilast leads to a meaningful and additional improvement in either pain or function, as compared with standard routine care.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据