The purpose of this early study is to compare the clinical results of the new Conduit Interbody device to the traditional Concorde Bullet Device. The primary objective is to explore the rates and reasons for re-operation between both constructs at 2 years.

The demand for lumbar fusion continues to rise with the growing and aging population. Additionally, new and innovative technologies continue to bring new devices to the market. However, our understanding of how emerging constructs compare with existing technology is lacking. The purpose of this study is to compare the clinical results of the new Conduit Interbody device to the traditional Concorde Bullet Device in lumbar fusion, one or two levels between L2-S1 will be included. Both transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) and posterior lumbar interbody fusion (PLIF) approaches will be included in the patient cohort. The primary objective is to explore the rates and reasons for re-operation between both constructs at 2 years.

Inclusion Criteria:

• Patients aged 18 or older with symptomatic degenerative lumbar spondylotic disease, either spondylosis, and/or spondylolisthesis
• who have failed conservative management of at least 6 weeks requiring 1 or 2 level lumbar interbody fusion (either PLIF or TLIF)
• All patients included will be index surgeries (no re-operations).

Exclusion Criteria:

• Patients who improve with consecutive management and do not undergo lumbar fusion surgery
• Surgery performed in the thoracic or cervical spine
• Surgery performed for tumor, infection, or trauma Patients who have an unstable fracture, tumor, and osteoporosis with T score exceeding -2.0

Inclusion of interbody devices resulted in higher of lumbar fusion, however, new devices have not been fully evaluated clinical and radiographically in terms of overall outcomes.

Data will be shared with DePuy Synthes

2 years

The data is accessed only by the study sponsor.