- ICH GCP
- US Clinical Trials Registry
- Clinical Trial NCT03276351
Evaluation of Fixation Achievable in Revision Total Knee Arthroplasty Implementing Latest-Generation Implant Technology
April 4, 2023 updated by: Brent Lanting, Lawson Health Research Institute
This is a prospective randomized control trial that aims to investigate fixation of implants after revision total knee replacement.
The investigators are comparing long-stemmed revision implants with hybrid cementation to short-stemmed primary implants with augment using a special type of x-ray imaging (radiostereometric analysis) to assess implant movement over time.
The investigators are also comparing costs and patient-reported outcomes between the groups.
Study Overview
Status
Completed
Conditions
Intervention / Treatment
Detailed Description
The demand for total knee replacement (TKR) continues to grow, especially for younger patients who are at a greater risk of outliving the useful lifetime of their implants, thus requiring revision surgery (Aggarwal et al., 2014; Stambough et al., 2014).
Rates of revision TKR are growing at an even faster rate than primary TKR.
Between 2009-10, the incidence of primary TKR grew by 9.4% in the U.S., while revision TKR grew by 17.1% (Kurtz et al., 2014).
Revision occurs for failures such as loosening, infection, or wear.
Unfortunately, patients undergoing revision TKR are roughly 6 times more likely to require re-revision compared to patients undergoing primary TKR, further increasing the revision burden.
Standard of care for revision TKR has evolved, in search of long-lasting fixation and improved patient outcomes.
In many centres, the current standard of care is to use revision TKR implants with long stems for enhanced fixation.
Surgeon preference is variable, however, as to whether these stems will be fully cemented, or whether only the most proximal aspect of the baseplate will be cemented (hybrid fixation).
While most common, these long-stemmed revision implants have suffered from poor survivorship, are technically demanding to implant, and can result in poor patient outcomes, including ongoing pain.
Over the past decade porous metal augments have gained favour.
These devices interface between the defective bone and the implant, aiding fixation.
The first augment of its kind are the Trabecular Metal cone augments from Zimmer.
Although an improvement in principle, they have a number of drawbacks including poor fit with most implant systems, increasing technical challenge and requiring intra-operative customization, which lengthens the surgery.
More recently, Stryker Tritanium augments have been introduced that offer a closer fit with Triathlon revision implants, decreasing operative time.
This closeness of fit also provides an opportunity to rethink the utilization of long stems when porous augments are used.
Ultimately, the goal would be for porous metal augments to completely fill all bone defects, essentially enabling a more primary-like TKR to be performed, enhancing patient outcomes.
The gold standard for measurement of implant fixation over time is radiostereometric analysis (RSA).
At the time of surgery, 0.8-1.0
mm Tantalum beads (typically n = 6-8 per region of interest) are inserted into the bone surrounding the implant of interest, and occasionally also into the polyethylene liner or insert of the implant.
RSA exams are then acquired within the first 2 weeks post-operation, and again at 6 weeks, 3 months, 6 months, 1 year, and 2 years.
Each exam involves a stereo x-ray acquisition with a calibration unit to reconstruct the 3D location of the implant relative to the marker beads.
Across each exam, the migration of the implant relative to the marker beads is tracked compared to the baseline exam acquired within the first 2 weeks.
RSA is extremely precise and accurate, and is able to track migrations on the order of 10's of microns.
Large early migrations within the first 1-2 years post-operation are predictive of eventual implant loosening and failure.
RSA can also be used to measure inducible displacement of implants to assess instantaneous fixation of implanted components.
These RSA exams compare a supine, unloaded image of the patient's joint to a standing, loaded image of their joint, to determine whether any movement occurs between the implant and marker beads with loading.
To our knowledge, only three published RSA studies of revision TKR exist in the literature.
Jensen et al. (2012) published a 2-year study with 40 patients comparing cement reconstruction to Trabecular Metal cones.
They found no significant difference between groups for migration at 2 years, and determined that use of the Trabecular Metal cones resulted in better early stability with reduced irregular motion patterns compared to using hybrid cement reconstruction.
Heesterbeek et al. (2016) published a 2-year study with 32 patients that compared hybrid to fully cemented stem fixation using the Legion revision system, which was followed up to 6.5 years by Kosse et al. (2017).
At both follow-up time points, there was no difference in overall migration between the hybrid and fully cemented stem groups.
Taken together, these studies do not reflect the latest thinking in revision knee surgery, do not account for the current generation of augment design, do not directly compare augments with hybrid and fully cemented fixation, and do not correlate fixation and patient outcome scores.
Study Type
Interventional
Enrollment (Actual)
12
Phase
- Not Applicable
Contacts and Locations
This section provides the contact details for those conducting the study, and information on where this study is being conducted.
Study Locations
-
-
Ontario
-
London, Ontario, Canada, N6A 5A5
- London Health Sciences Centre
-
-
Participation Criteria
Researchers look for people who fit a certain description, called eligibility criteria. Some examples of these criteria are a person's general health condition or prior treatments.
Eligibility Criteria
Ages Eligible for Study
18 years and older (Adult, Older Adult)
Accepts Healthy Volunteers
No
Genders Eligible for Study
All
Description
Inclusion Criteria:
- Patients undergoing a first total knee revision surgery
Exclusion Criteria:
- Patients who have previously undergone revision knee surgery
- Patients that require a hinged revision implant
- Patients that do not speak or understand English (questionnaires provided in English)
- Patients with any active or suspected latent infection in or about the knee joint
- Patients with bone stock compromised by disease, infection or prior implantation which cannot provide adequate support and/or fixation to the prosthesis
- Patients that live >100km from our centre (as such individuals are less likely to be available for the required follow-up appointments)
Study Plan
This section provides details of the study plan, including how the study is designed and what the study is measuring.
How is the study designed?
Design Details
- Primary Purpose: Treatment
- Allocation: Randomized
- Interventional Model: Parallel Assignment
- Masking: Single
Arms and Interventions
Participant Group / Arm |
Intervention / Treatment |
---|---|
Active Comparator: Long-Stemmed with Hybrid Fixation
Participants will receive the Long-Stemmed revision implant with Hybrid Fixation during their surgery.
|
Long-stemmed revision implant with hybrid fixation for total knee arthroplasty
|
Experimental: Short-Stemmed with Augmented Fixation
Participants will receive the Short-Stemmed primary implant with Augmented Fixation during their surgery.
|
Short-stemmed primary implant with augmented fixation for total knee arthroplasty
|
What is the study measuring?
Primary Outcome Measures
Outcome Measure |
Measure Description |
Time Frame |
---|---|---|
Implant Migration Over Time
Time Frame: 0-2 weeks (baseline exam) to 1 year
|
Tibial component migration over time measured through radiostereometric analysis
|
0-2 weeks (baseline exam) to 1 year
|
Secondary Outcome Measures
Outcome Measure |
Measure Description |
Time Frame |
---|---|---|
Inducible displacement of the tibial component
Time Frame: Pre-operatively, 6 weeks, 3 months, 6 months, 1 year, and 2 years
|
Inducible displacement of implants to assess instantaneous fixation of implanted components measured through radiostereometric analysis
|
Pre-operatively, 6 weeks, 3 months, 6 months, 1 year, and 2 years
|
Total costs
Time Frame: Surgery
|
Total costs of implants, bone cement and operating time will be recorded.
|
Surgery
|
KOOS Knee Survey
Time Frame: Pre-operatively, 6 weeks, 3 months, 6 months, 1 year, and 2 years
|
Patient-reported measure to assess function, pain and stiffness.
|
Pre-operatively, 6 weeks, 3 months, 6 months, 1 year, and 2 years
|
The Veterans Rand 12 Item Health Survey (VR-12)
Time Frame: Pre-operatively, 6 weeks, 3 months, 6 months, 1 year, and 2 years
|
Patient-reported measure to assess quality of life.
|
Pre-operatively, 6 weeks, 3 months, 6 months, 1 year, and 2 years
|
Knee Society score
Time Frame: Pre-operatively, 6 weeks, 3 months, 6 months, 1 year, and 2 years
|
Clinician-reported outcome measure to assess function, pain and range of motion.
|
Pre-operatively, 6 weeks, 3 months, 6 months, 1 year, and 2 years
|
Euro-Quol Group EQ-5D
Time Frame: Pre-operatively, 6 weeks, 3 months, 6 months, 1 year, and 2 years
|
Patient-reported measure to assess quality of life
|
Pre-operatively, 6 weeks, 3 months, 6 months, 1 year, and 2 years
|
Collaborators and Investigators
This is where you will find people and organizations involved with this study.
Sponsor
Investigators
- Principal Investigator: Brent A Lanting, MD, FRCSC, London Health Sciences Centre
Publications and helpful links
The person responsible for entering information about the study voluntarily provides these publications. These may be about anything related to the study.
General Publications
- Kurtz SM, Ong KL, Lau E, Bozic KJ. Impact of the economic downturn on total joint replacement demand in the United States: updated projections to 2021. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2014 Apr 16;96(8):624-30. doi: 10.2106/JBJS.M.00285.
- Jensen CL, Petersen MM, Schroder HM, Flivik G, Lund B. Revision total knee arthroplasty with the use of trabecular metal cones: a randomized radiostereometric analysis with 2 years of follow-up. J Arthroplasty. 2012 Dec;27(10):1820-1826.e2. doi: 10.1016/j.arth.2012.04.036. Epub 2012 Jul 13.
- Aggarwal VK, Goyal N, Deirmengian G, Rangavajulla A, Parvizi J, Austin MS. Revision total knee arthroplasty in the young patient: is there trouble on the horizon? J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2014 Apr 2;96(7):536-42. doi: 10.2106/JBJS.M.00131.
- Heesterbeek PJ, Wymenga AB, van Hellemondt GG. No Difference in Implant Micromotion Between Hybrid Fixation and Fully Cemented Revision Total Knee Arthroplasty: A Randomized Controlled Trial with Radiostereometric Analysis of Patients with Mild-to-Moderate Bone Loss. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2016 Aug 17;98(16):1359-69. doi: 10.2106/JBJS.15.00909.
- Kosse NM, van Hellemondt GG, Wymenga AB, Heesterbeek PJ. Comparable Stability of Cemented vs Press-Fit Placed Stems in Revision Total Knee Arthroplasty With Mild to Moderate Bone Loss: 6.5-Year Results From a Randomized Controlled Trial With Radiostereometric Analysis. J Arthroplasty. 2017 Jan;32(1):197-201. doi: 10.1016/j.arth.2016.06.003. Epub 2016 Jul 14.
- Stambough JB, Clohisy JC, Barrack RL, Nunley RM, Keeney JA. Increased risk of failure following revision total knee replacement in patients aged 55 years and younger. Bone Joint J. 2014 Dec;96-B(12):1657-62. doi: 10.1302/0301-620X.96B12.34486.
Study record dates
These dates track the progress of study record and summary results submissions to ClinicalTrials.gov. Study records and reported results are reviewed by the National Library of Medicine (NLM) to make sure they meet specific quality control standards before being posted on the public website.
Study Major Dates
Study Start (Actual)
April 20, 2018
Primary Completion (Actual)
December 12, 2022
Study Completion (Actual)
December 12, 2022
Study Registration Dates
First Submitted
September 6, 2017
First Submitted That Met QC Criteria
September 7, 2017
First Posted (Actual)
September 8, 2017
Study Record Updates
Last Update Posted (Actual)
April 5, 2023
Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria
April 4, 2023
Last Verified
April 1, 2023
More Information
Terms related to this study
Additional Relevant MeSH Terms
Other Study ID Numbers
- 109487
Drug and device information, study documents
Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated drug product
No
Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated device product
No
This information was retrieved directly from the website clinicaltrials.gov without any changes. If you have any requests to change, remove or update your study details, please contact register@clinicaltrials.gov. As soon as a change is implemented on clinicaltrials.gov, this will be updated automatically on our website as well.
Clinical Trials on Knee Osteoarthritis
-
LifeBridge HealthMicroPort Orthopedics Inc.; Rubin Institute for Advanced OrthopedicsRecruitingKnee Osteoarthritis | Osteoarthritis, Knee | Knee Pain Chronic | Arthropathy of Knee Joint | Knee Disease | Osteoarthritis Knees Both | Osteoarthritis Knee Left | Osteoarthritis Knee RightUnited States
-
University Hospital, Clermont-FerrandSanofiCompletedKnee Osteoarthritis (Knee OA)France
-
Joseph E. BroylesCompletedDegenerative Lesion of Articular Cartilage of Knee | Degeneration; Articular Cartilage, Knee | Unilateral Primary Osteoarthritis of Knee | Osteoarthritis Knee
-
The Hong Kong Polytechnic UniversityCompleted
-
Federal University of São PauloCompletedKNEE OSTEOARTHRITISBrazil
-
Jiangsu XinChen-Techfields Pharma Co., LTD.Completed
-
Thammasat UniversityCompletedPrimary Knee OsteoarthritisThailand
-
Galderma R&DCompletedUnilateral Knee OsteoarthritisUnited Kingdom
-
National Yang Ming UniversityFar Eastern Memorial HospitalCompletedMedial Knee OsteoarthritisTaiwan
-
Hanlim Pharm. Co., Ltd.CompletedKnee OsteoarthritisKorea, Republic of
Clinical Trials on Long-Stemmed with Hybrid Fixation
-
Royal Devon and Exeter NHS Foundation TrustActive, not recruitingTotal Knee ArthroplastyUnited Kingdom
-
National Taiwan University HospitalNational Taiwan University Hospital Hsin-Chu Branch; National Taiwan University...Not yet recruitingBone Metastases | Pathological Fracture | Pathological Fracture, Left Femur | Pathological Fracture, Right Femur
-
Egyptian Biomedical Research NetworkCompletedCritical Lower Limb Ischemia
-
Peking University Third HospitalRecruiting
-
Ain Shams UniversityCompleted
-
Medical Park Gaziantep HospitalMuğla Sıtkı Koçman University; Bahçeşehir UniversityCompletedRecurrence | Hernia, Inguinal | Hernia, Femoral | Inguinal Hernia, Indirect | Inguinal Hernia, Direct | Neuralgia, Atypical | Neuralgia, Ilioinguinal | Neuralgia, Iliohypogastric NerveTurkey
-
Jinling Hospital, ChinaNational Natural Science Foundation of ChinaUnknownThoracolumbar Burst FractureChina
-
Assiut UniversityNot yet recruitingAnkle Injuries | Ankle Fractures | Arthroscopic Surgery
-
Turku University HospitalHelsinki University Central Hospital; Oulu University Hospital; Kuopio University... and other collaboratorsRecruiting
-
University Hospital OstravaRecruitingAdult Patients With Mid-term or Long-term Venous AccessCzechia