Safety and Effectiveness Study of OR3O™ Dual Mobility System in THA (OR3O)

Prospective, Multi-center Study to Evaluate the Safety and Effectiveness of the OR3O™ Dual Mobility System in Primary and Revision Total Hip Arthroplasty (THA) Procedures

The purpose of this study is to assess the safety and effectiveness of the OR3O™ Dual Mobility System. The study will evaluate the outcome of the Total Hip Arthroplasty using the OR3O™ Dual Mobility System over a ten year period. Survivorship of THA will be assessed up to ten years.

Study Overview

• Status: Active, not recruiting
• Conditions: Advanced Degeneration of the Hip Joint; Revision of the Hip Joint
• Intervention / Treatment: Device: Primary Total Hip Arthroplasty; Device: Revision Total Hip Arthroplasty

• Study Type: Observational
• Enrollment (Actual): 177

Contacts and Locations

Study Locations

• Australia
  • Deakin, Australia, 2600
    • Calvary John James Hospital
  • Queensland
    • Brisbane, Queensland, Australia, 4101
      • Mater Health Services
  • Western Australia
    • Perth, Western Australia, Australia, 6000
      • Royal Perth Hospital
• Canada
  • Alberta
    • Calgary, Alberta, Canada, T3M127
      • South Health Campus, Calgary
  • Ontario
    • Toronto, Ontario, Canada, M5C1R6
      • St Michael's Hospital
• Hong Kong
  • Hong Kong, Hong Kong, 2255
    • Queen Mary Hospital
• United States
  • Kentucky
    • Lexington, Kentucky, United States, 40508
      • University Of Kentucky
  • Nebraska
    • Omaha, Nebraska, United States, 69198
      • University of Nebraska Medical Center
  • New York
    • New York, New York, United States, 10021
      • Hospital for Special Surgery
    • New York, New York, United States, 10003
      • NYU Langone Health
  • North Carolina
    • Winston-Salem, North Carolina, United States, 27157
      • Wake Forest School of Medicine
  • Texas
    • Austin, Texas, United States, 78705
      • St. David's Center for Hip and Knee Replacement

Participation Criteria

Eligibility Criteria

• Ages Eligible for Study: 18 years to 80 years (Adult, Older Adult)
• Accepts Healthy Volunteers: No

• Sampling Method: Non-Probability Sample

Study Population

Subject is a suitable candidate for implanting the OR3O™ Dual Mobility System in primary or revision total hip replacement in the Investigator's judgement

Description

Inclusion Criteria:

All subjects:

• Subject is a suitable candidate for implanting the OR3O™ Dual Mobility System in primary or revision total hip replacement in the Investigator's judgement.
• Subject is skeletally mature in the Investigator's judgement.
• Subject is 18 - 80 years old (inclusive).

• Subject has any of the following conditions:

  • Advanced degeneration of the hip joint as a result of degenerative, post-traumatic, or rheumatoid arthritis (RA);
  • Fracture or avascular necrosis of the femoral head;
  • Failure of previous hip surgery: joint reconstruction, internal fixation, arthrodesis, hemiarthroplasty, surface replacement arthroplasty, or total hip replacement;
  • All forms of osteoarthritis (OA);
  • Patients with hips at risk of dislocation;
  • Femoral neck fracture or proximal hip joint fracture.
• Subject provides written informed consent for study participation using an Independent Ethical Committee (IEC) / Institutional Review Board (IRB) approved consent form before any study procedures are performed, including pre-operative data review and/or collection of data on electronic Case Report Forms (eCRFs).
• Subject is willing and able to participate in required follow-up visits and is able to complete study activities.
• Subject has all required study pre-operative and operative data available in their medical record for collection if consent is given after their THA surgery.

Revision Subjects:

• Subject has a REDAPT™ Modular Shell implanted which does not require revision or will receive a REDAPT™ Modular Shell during revision THA.
• Subject has a S+N compatible stem which does not require revision or will receive a S+N compatible stem during revision THA.

Exclusion Criteria:

All subjects:

• Subject has conditions that would eliminate or tend to eliminate adequate implant support or prevent the use of an appropriately-sized implant, e.g.:

  • blood supply limitations;
  • insufficient quantity or quality of bone support, e.g., osteoporosis, metabolic disorders which may impair bone formation, radioactive bone disease, tumor around hip joint, and osteomalacia;
  • infections or other conditions which may lead to increased bone resorption.
• Subject has dysplasia of hip joint with CROWE Grade III, IV.
• Subject has bodily disease(s) that may interfere with THA survival or outcome.
• Subject has life expectancy of less than 10 years.
• Subject has mental or neurological conditions which impair the subject's ability or willingness to restrict activities that may put the affected limb at risk.
• Subject has physical conditions or activities which tend to place extreme loads on implants, e.g., Charcot joints, muscle deficiencies, multiple joint disabilities.
• Subject has neuromuscular dysfunctions (paralysis, myolysis and abductor muscle weakness) which will cause unstable hip joint or abnormal gait after surgery.
• Subject has an emotional or neurological condition that would pre-empt their ability or willingness to participate in the study.
• Subject has an active infection - systemic or at the site of intended surgery.
• Subject has a Body Mass Index > 40.0 kg/m².
• Subject has a known allergy to any component of the devices used in the study.
• Subject is pregnant or breast feeding.
• Subject is entered in another investigational drug, biologic, or device study within 30 days of active study participation.

Revision Subjects:

• Subject has inadequate implant support with an increased risk of implant failure if support is not achieved, poor bone quality exists, or smaller sized implants are utilized.
• Subject needs revision of a fractured ceramic head or liner.
• Subject was already enrolled into this study as primary THA case.

Study Plan

How is the study designed?

Design Details

• Observational Models: Other
• Time Perspectives: Prospective

Number of groups / cohorts

2

Cohorts and Interventions

Group / Cohort	Intervention / Treatment
Primary Total Hip Arthroplasty (THA); OR3O Dual Mobility System used in primary THA	Device: Primary Total Hip Arthroplasty; Primary Total Hip Arthroplasty using the OR3O Dual Mobility System in combination with compatible components
Revision Total Hip Arthroplasty (THA); OR3O Dual Mobility System used in revision THA	Device: Revision Total Hip Arthroplasty; Revision Total Hip Arthroplasty using the OR3O Dual Mobility System in combination with compatible components

What is the study measuring?

Primary Outcome Measures

Outcome Measure	Measure Description	Time Frame
Survivorship of Primary Total Hip Arthroplasty (THA)	Assess survivorship of the OR3O™ Dual Mobility System at 2 years post implantation in Primary THA procedures. Survivorship is defined as no revision of the Acetabular Implant and OR3O™ Liner.	2 years

Secondary Outcome Measures

Outcome Measure	Measure Description	Time Frame
Survivorship of individual Total Hip Arthroplasty (THA) components (OR3O Dual Mobility, acetabular shell, femoral head)	Survivorship of the following specific components will be presented individually: OR3O™Dual Mobility System, Acetabular Shell, Femoral head. The endpoint of interest is time to occurrence of a revision of the specific component due to any reason.	up to 10 years
Five-level EuroQol five-dimensional (EQ-5D-5L) score	The EQ-5D-5L score consists of two parts: a descriptive system and a visual analogue scale. The descriptive system is used to describe the subject's health state and consists of five dimensions: mobility, self-care, usual activities, pain/discomfort and anxiety/depression. Each dimension has 5 levels to choose the most appropriate answer: no problems, slight problems, moderate problems, severe problems and extreme problems. The subject is asked to indicate his/her health state by marking the most appropriate statement in each of the five areas. The visual analogue scale records the subject's self-rated health on a vertical visual analogue scale.The endpoints on the scale are labelled 'The best health you can imagine' and 'The worst health you can imagine'. The VAS can be used as a quantitative measure of health outcome as judged by the individual respondents.	Pre-Op, 6 weeks, 6 months, 1 year, 2 years, 3 years, 5 years, 7 years, and 10 years
Hip Disability and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score for Joint Replacement (HOOS JR.)	The HOOS JR. is a short-form survey based on the Hip Disability and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (HOOS) that specifically focuses on the outcome after THA. HOOS JR. consists of 2 areas: pain (2 items) and function, daily living (4 items). The last week is taken into consideration when answering the questions. Standardized answer options are given (5 Likert boxes - no, mild, moderate, severe, extreme) and each question gets a score from 0 to 4. An interval score from 0-100 (0 indicating total hip disability and 100 indicating perfect hip health) is calculated (15).	Pre-Op, 6 weeks, 6 months, 1 year, 2 years, 3 years, 5 years, 7 years, and 10 years
Harris Hip Score (HHS)	The Harris Hip Score is a joint specific score that consists of 10 items covering domains of pain (1 item, 0-44 points), function (7 items, 0-47 points), functional activities, absence of deformity (1 item, 0 or 4 points), and hip range of motion (2 items, 0-5 points). Total scores range from 0 (worst) to 100 (best). The total scores and scores for each of the domains will be presented. The modified Harris Hip Score (mHHS) includes all the same domains as the HHS except for the hip range of motion (2 items, 0-5 points). Total mHHHs scores range from 0 (worst) to 95 (best). The total mHHS score maybe used in place of the total HHS score.	Pre-Op, 6 weeks, 6 months, 1 year, 2 years, 5 years, and 10 years
Forgotten Joint Score 12 (FJS-12)	The Forgotten Joint Score 12 (FJS-12) is a self-administered score where subjects are asked to rate their awareness of their hip arthroplasty in 12 questions with a five-point Likert response format: "Never", "almost never", "seldom", "sometimes" and "mostly". The item scores are summed and linearly transformed in a 0 to 100 scale with a high value reflecting the ability of the subject to forget about the replaced hip joint during the activities of daily living (i.e., higher score is a better outcome).	Pre-Op, 6 weeks, 6 months, 1 year, 2 years, 5 years, and 10 years
Radiographic Assessment - Acetabular Cup Migration	Acetabular Cup Migration will be assessed from radiographs with the following definitions: 0 - Absent: No evidence of acetabular cup migration ≥ 3 mm from baseline 1 - Present: Presence of acetabular cup migration ≥ 3mm from baseline	6 weeks, 1 year, 2 years, 5 years, and 10 years
Radiographic Assessment - Femoral Stem Subsidence	Femoral Stem Subsidence will be assessed from radiographs with the following definitions: 0 - Absent: No evidence of inferior movement of the femoral stem ≥ 3mm. 1 - Present: Presence of inferior movement of the femoral stem compared to previously available imaging ≥ 3mm.	6 weeks, 1 year, 2 years, 5 years, and 10 years
Radiographic Assessment - Osseointegration Status - Acetabular Cup	Osseointegration Status - Acetabular Cup will be assessed from radiographs with the following definitions: 0 - Absent: Absence of all radiographic signs or presence of only one radiographic sign of acetabular cup osseointegration; - Partial: Presence of two radiographic signs of acetabular cup osseointegration.; - Complete: Presence of three or more radiographic signs of acetabular cup osseointegration.	6 weeks, 1 year, 2 years, 5 years, and 10 years
Radiographic Assessment - Acetabular Cup Loosening	Acetabular Cup Loosening will be assessed from radiographs with the following definitions: 0 - Absent: No evidence of specific imaging features of loosening at the acetabular bone-implant interface including significant radiolucency or change in position of the acetabular cup indicating a loss of fixation. 1 - Present: Presence of apparent imaging features of loosening at the acetabular bone-implant interface including significant radiolucency or change in position of the acetabular cup indicating a loss of fixation.	6 weeks, 1 year, 2 years, 5 years, and 10 years
Radiographic Assessment - Device Integrity	Device Integrity will be assessed from radiographs with the following definitions: 0 - Intact: No evidence of fracture, breakage or disassembly of any device component. 1 - Failed: Presence of fracture, breakage or disassembly of one or more device components.	6 weeks, 1 year, 2 years, 5 years, and 10 years
Radiographic Assessment - Progressive Radiolucency Acetabular Zones	Progressive Radiolucency in all acetabular zones will be assessed from radiographs with the following definitions: 0 - None: No evidence of an increase in width of the radiolucency > 1 mm 1 - Present: Presence of an increase in width of the radiolucency > 1 mm	6 weeks, 1 year, 2 years, 5 years, and 10 years
Radiographic Assessment - Progressive Radiolucency Femoral Zones	Progressive Radiolucency in all femoral zones will be assessed from radiographs with the following definitions: 0 - None: No evidence of an increase in width of the radiolucency > 1 mm 1 - Present: Presence of an increase in width of the radiolucency > 1 mm	6 weeks, 1 year, 2 years, 5 years, and 10 years
Radiographic Assessment - Osteolysis - Acetabular Cup	Osteolysis Acetabular Cup will be assessed from radiographs with the following definitions: 0 - None: No evidence of a ballooning / scalloping, progressive, periacetabular, bony destructive lesion with a maximum dimension > 5mm. 1 - Present: Presence of a ballooning / scalloping, progressive, periacetabular, bony destructive lesion with a maximum dimension > 5mm.	6 weeks, 1 year, 2 years, 5 years, and 10 years
Radiographic Assessment - Osteolysis - Femoral Stem	Osteolysis Femoral Stem will be assessed from radiographs with the following definitions: 0 - None: No evidence of a ballooning / scalloping, progressive, perifemoral, bony destructive lesion with a maximum dimension > 5mm. 1 - Present: Presence of a ballooning / scalloping, progressive, perifemoral, bony destructive lesion with a maximum dimension > 5mm.	6 weeks, 1 year, 2 years, 5 years, and 10 years
Radiographic Assessment - Anatomic Fracture	Anatomic Fracture will be assessed from radiographs with the following definitions: 0 - Absent: No evidence of anatomic fracture or other related complication. 1 - Present: One or more of the following conditions are present: pelvic bone fracture or femoral bone fracture.	6 weeks, 1 year, 2 years, 5 years, and 10 years
Radiographic Assessment - Heterotopic Ossification	Heterotopic Ossification will be assessed from radiographs with the following definitions: 0 - None: No evidence of heterotopic bone formation; - Grade 1: (Class I) Islands of bone within the soft tissue about the hip; - Grade 2: (Class II) Bone spurs from the pelvis or proximal end of the femur, leaving at least a centimeter between opposing bone surfaces.; - Grade 3: (Class III) Bone spurs from the pelvis or proximal end of the femur, reducing the space between opossing bone surfaces to less than 1 cm.; - Grade 4: (Class IV) apparent bone ankylosis of the hip	6 weeks, 1 year, 2 years, 5 years, and 10 years

Collaborators and Investigators

• Sponsor: Smith & Nephew, Inc.
• Investigators: Principal Investigator: Ran Schwarzkopf, MD, NYU Langone Health

Study record dates

Study Major Dates

• Study Start (Actual): July 27, 2020
• Primary Completion (Actual): February 23, 2026
• Study Completion (Estimated): January 31, 2035

Study Registration Dates

• First Submitted: March 25, 2020
• First Submitted That Met QC Criteria: March 25, 2020
• First Posted (Actual): March 27, 2020

Study Record Updates

• Last Update Posted (Actual): May 22, 2026
• Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria: May 19, 2026
• Last Verified: March 1, 2026

More Information

Terms related to this study

• Keywords: hip replacement; THA; hip joint; Dual Mobility; OR3O; hip revision; hip implant
• Other Study ID Numbers: OR3O.2019.08

Plan for Individual participant data (IPD)

• Plan to Share Individual Participant Data (IPD)?: YES

Drug and device information, study documents

• Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated drug product: No
• Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated device product: Yes
• product manufactured in and exported from the U.S.: No