LinkedInXFacebook
Subscribe
Orthopedics This Week
  • My Feed
  • |Posts
  • |Events
  • |MSK Innovations
  • |Power Rankings
  • |Masterclasses
  • |Technology Awards
  • Press Releases
  • |Advertising
  • |Job Board
  • Spine
  • ◆Joints
  • ◆Upper Extremities
  • ◆Foot & Ankle
  • ◆Sports Medicine
  • ◆Pain Mgmt
  • ◆Trauma
  • ◆Biologics
  • ◆Technology
  • ◆People
  • ◆Company News
  • ◆Legal & Regulatory
Home/Spine/SI-BONE: Three New Studies on iFuse
Spine

SI-BONE: Three New Studies on iFuse

September 14, 2015 2 min read Premium comments

Advertisement

SI-BONE: Three New Studies on iFuse
Courtesy of SI-BONE, Inc.
Secondary

SI-BONE, Inc. is on a publishing roll, with two prospective randomized clinical trials appearing in print, as well as a systematic review of 18 MIS (minimally invasive surgery) SI (sacroiliac) joint fusion studies.

The first clinical trial—the INSITE (Investigation of Sacroiliac Fusion Treatment)—was published in Neurosurgery and involved 19 institutions. The study, which included 148 patients, examined minimally invasive SI joint fusion as compared to non-surgical management of chronic SI joint dysfunction.

At 12 months, clinically important improvements in SI joint pain on the Visual Analog Scale (VAS) were seen in 81.6% of SI joint fusion subjects, but in only 12.5% of those who had nonoperative treatment. Patients in the surgical group experienced sustained pain relief at 12 months; those who crossed over to iFuse treatment did nearly as well as those originally assigned to iFuse surgery.

David Polly, M.D., is professor and chief of spine surgery at the University of Minnesota, and lead author on the INSITE study. Asked about the most interesting portion of the research, he told OTW, “A high quality data set that really answers the question. It was also interesting to see that 10% did respond to non-surgical management after having failed it for at least 6 months—now we have to figure out how to identify that subgroup. Hopefully, surgeons will pay attention to the differential diagnosis of low back and buttock pain and not just presume it is spine or the hip.”

Regarding future work that should be undertaken, Dr. Polly noted, “Figuring out the psychological distress aspect for responders vs. non responders to the surgical treatment.”

The second clinical trial—SIFI (Sacroiliac Joint Fusion with iFuse Implant System)—was published in Global Spine Journal and involved 26 facilities and 172 participants. The results showed that mean SI joint pain improved from 79.8 at baseline to 30.0 and 30.4 at six and 12 months, respectively. Mean Oswestry Disability Index improved from 55.2 at baseline to 32.5 and 31.4 at six and 12 months, respectively.

The third study, a systematic review and meta-analysis, was published in International Journal of Spine Surgery. The researchers reviewed the clinical outcomes of patients who underwent MIS SI joint fusion using a lateral transarticular approach. They found that this approach meant minimal blood loss: 36.9 cc (10-70 cc range), a brief operating time: 59 minutes (27-28 minute range), and a shorter length of stay: 1.7 days (0-7 day range).

Daniel Cher, M.D. is vice president of clinical affairs at SI-BONE, and was involved in all three studies. He told OTW, “It was great to see the enthusiasm and excitement from spine surgeons to be able to participate in a surgery vs. non-surgery trial. These types of studies are challenging and very rare these days and of course, the results were really excellent to say the least.”

“Hopefully, this research will encourage the use of the iFuse Implant System to perform SI joint fusions in appropriately diagnosed patients with SI joint dysfunction who have failed to respond to non-surgical treatments. Going forward we need long-term follow-up.”

React:

Discussion

14
DS
Dr. Sarah MitchellOrthopedic Surgeon · Mayo Clinic

This is a fascinating development. In my practice we've seen similar outcomes with the revised protocol. The key differentiator seems to be patient selection criteria. Has anyone else noticed the correlation with BMI thresholds?

8
JT
James Thornton, MDSpine Fellow · HSS

Great point. I'd push back slightly on the conclusion, the sample size in the cited study is too small to draw population-level inferences. That said, the directional signal is compelling and worth a larger RCT.

5
RP
R. PatelSports Medicine · Stanford

We implemented a similar approach last year. Early results are promising but we're still gathering 12-month follow-up data. Happy to share our protocol if anyone is interested.

Join the conversation

Orthopedic professionals are discussing this. Sign in and upgrade to read every comment and add your voice.

Subscribe

Get Full Access

Read every OTW article and join member discussions for $24.99/month.

Get Full Access

Advertisement

Advertisement

Advertisement

Orthopedics This Week

The most trusted source in orthopedic industry news since 2005. Covering spine, joints, trauma, biologics, and the business of orthopedics.

A publication of RRY Publications, LLC

LinkedInXFacebook

Categories

  • Spine
  • Joints
  • Upper Extremities
  • Foot & Ankle
  • Sports Medicine
  • Pain Mgmt
  • Trauma
  • Biologics
  • Technology
  • People
  • Company News
  • Legal & Regulatory

Resources

  • Subscribe
  • Community Posts
  • Job Board
  • Press Release Opportunities
  • Power Rankings
  • About OTW
  • Advertise
  • Contact Us

Get Full Access

Unlimited articles, community posts, and Power Rankings.

Get Full Access

Plans start at $24.99/mo · Annual saves 20%

© 2026 Orthopedics This Week · RRY Publications, LLC

Privacy PolicyTerms of ServiceCookie Policy