Arthroplasty Clinical Trial
Official title:
A Post-market Observational ORIGIN® vs. VANGUARD® PS Clinical Study: a Comparative, Prospective, Randomized Controlled Clinical and Radiological Evaluation.
The study objective is to assess patient satisfaction after the surgery with a custom-made CE marked implant (ORIGIN®) versus off-the-shelf (VANGUARD PS) device, and to document the clinical and device performance outcomes of the ORIGIN System used in routine hospital practice in a large patient cohort treatment of total knee arthroplasty. The hypothesis is that patients receiving ORIGIN implants will experience a more natural feel of the prosthesis during the first year after the surgery compared to patients receiving VANGUARD implants (as measured with FJS), and slightly significant improvement at the following interval of 2 years. The overall patient satisfaction is expected to be improved after 2 years follow-up. It is also supposed that the overall patient satisfaction is expected to be higher with ORIGIN PS than with VANGUARD PS treatment.
Status | Recruiting |
Enrollment | 140 |
Est. completion date | November 2024 |
Est. primary completion date | August 2024 |
Accepts healthy volunteers | No |
Gender | All |
Age group | 18 Years and older |
Eligibility | Inclusion Criteria: - Male and female over 18 years of age - Each patient, or his or her guardian or legal representative, is willing to give informed consent. - Clinically indicated for a total Knee replacement - Females who are not pregnant or lactating and not planning to become pregnant = 12 months. A pregnancy test may be performed to confirm this. - Geographically stable and willing to return to the implanting site for all follow-up visits at 1 year and 2 years. Exclusion Criteria: - Life expectancy = 1 year - Age = 80 years - Acute or chronic, local or systemic infection - Mental illness - Muscular, ligamental, neurological, psychological or vascular deficits - Bone destruction or poor bone quality likely to affect implant stability (requiring a femoral and/or a tibial stem and/or a thick insert) - Any concomitant condition likely to affect implant integration or function - Allergy or hypersensitivity to any of the materials used - For devices in CoCrMo (ISO 5832/4): renal and hepatic impairment - Hip Knee Ankle (HKA) angle < 165° or > 195° |
Country | Name | City | State |
---|---|---|---|
Germany | Lukas Eckhard | Mainz |
Lead Sponsor | Collaborator |
---|---|
Symbios Orthopedie SA |
Germany,
Behrend H, Giesinger K, Giesinger JM, Kuster MS. The "forgotten joint" as the ultimate goal in joint arthroplasty: validation of a new patient-reported outcome measure. J Arthroplasty. 2012 Mar;27(3):430-436.e1. doi: 10.1016/j.arth.2011.06.035. Epub 2011 Oct 13. — View Citation
Carlson VR, Post ZD, Orozco FR, Davis DM, Lutz RW, Ong AC. When Does the Knee Feel Normal Again: A Cross-Sectional Study Assessing the Forgotten Joint Score in Patients After Total Knee Arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty. 2018 Mar;33(3):700-703. doi: 10.1016/j.arth.2017.09.063. Epub 2017 Oct 7. — View Citation
Giesinger K, Hamilton DF, Jost B, Holzner B, Giesinger JM. Comparative responsiveness of outcome measures for total knee arthroplasty. Osteoarthritis Cartilage. 2014 Feb;22(2):184-9. doi: 10.1016/j.joca.2013.11.001. Epub 2013 Nov 18. — View Citation
Hamilton DF, Loth FL, Giesinger JM, Giesinger K, MacDonald DJ, Patton JT, Simpson AH, Howie CR. Validation of the English language Forgotten Joint Score-12 as an outcome measure for total hip and knee arthroplasty in a British population. Bone Joint J. 2017 Feb;99-B(2):218-224. doi: 10.1302/0301-620X.99B2.BJJ-2016-0606.R1. — View Citation
Kahlenberg CA, Lyman S, Joseph AD, Chiu YF, Padgett DE. Comparison of patient-reported outcomes based on implant brand in total knee arthroplasty: a prospective cohort study. Bone Joint J. 2019 Jul;101-B(7_Supple_C):48-54. doi: 10.1302/0301-620X.101B7.BJJ-2018-1382.R1. — View Citation
Thienpont E, Opsomer G, Koninckx A, Houssiau F. Joint awareness in different types of knee arthroplasty evaluated with the Forgotten Joint score. J Arthroplasty. 2014 Jan;29(1):48-51. doi: 10.1016/j.arth.2013.04.024. Epub 2013 May 18. — View Citation
Thompson SM, Salmon LJ, Webb JM, Pinczewski LA, Roe JP. Construct Validity and Test Re-Test Reliability of the Forgotten Joint Score. J Arthroplasty. 2015 Nov;30(11):1902-5. doi: 10.1016/j.arth.2015.05.001. Epub 2015 May 13. — View Citation
Thomsen MG, Latifi R, Kallemose T, Husted H, Troelsen A. Does knee awareness differ between different knee arthroplasty prostheses? A matched, case-control, cross-sectional study. BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2016 Apr 1;17:141. doi: 10.1186/s12891-016-1001-3. — View Citation
Wheatley B, Nappo K, Fisch J, Rego L, Shay M, Cannova C. Early outcomes of patient-specific posterior stabilized total knee arthroplasty implants. J Orthop. 2018 Dec 6;16(1):14-18. doi: 10.1016/j.jor.2018.11.003. eCollection 2019 Jan-Feb. — View Citation
Young SW, Walker ML, Bayan A, Briant-Evans T, Pavlou P, Farrington B. The Chitranjan S. Ranawat Award : No Difference in 2-year Functional Outcomes Using Kinematic versus Mechanical Alignment in TKA: A Randomized Controlled Clinical Trial. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2017 Jan;475(1):9-20. doi: 10.1007/s11999-016-4844-x. — View Citation
Type | Measure | Description | Time frame | Safety issue |
---|---|---|---|---|
Primary | Forgotten Joint Score | The Forgotten Joint Score is a joint-specific questionnaire is defined in 12 questions and measure the ability of the patient to forget their operated knee after the surgery.
The outcome Score is between 0-4. Zero is best outcome. Low score means high satisfaction. All responses are summed and multiplied by 25 (Total= 0-100) |
Baseline (preoperative visit) | |
Primary | Forgotten Joint Score | The Forgotten Joint Score is a joint-specific questionnaire is defined in 12 questions and measure the ability of the patient to forget their operated knee after the surgery.
The outcome Score is between 0-4. Zero is best outcome. Low score means high satisfaction. All responses are summed and multiplied by 25 (Total= 0-100) |
1 year | |
Primary | Forgotten Joint Score | The Forgotten Joint Score is a joint-specific questionnaire is defined in 12 questions and measure the ability of the patient to forget their operated knee after the surgery.
The outcome Score is between 0-4. Zero is best outcome. Low score means high satisfaction. All responses are summed and multiplied by 25 (Total= 0-100) |
2 years | |
Primary | The Self-Administered Patient Satisfaction Scale | The Self-Administered Patient Satisfaction Scale (SAPS) is defined in 4 questions and measure the patient satisfaction regarding the surgery with a CE marked custom-made implant (ORIGIN®) versus off-the-shelf (VANGUARD PS) device.
The items include patients' overall satisfaction with surgery, the extent of pain relief, the ability to perform home or yard work, and the ability to perform recreational activities. Items are scored on a 4-point Likert scale with response categories consisting of very satisfied (100 points), somewhat satisfied (75 points), somewhat dissatisfied (50 points), and very dissatisfied (25 points). The scale score is the unweighted mean of the scores from the individual items, ranging from 25 to 100 per item (with 100 being most satisfied). |
Baseline (preoperative visit) | |
Primary | The Self-Administered Patient Satisfaction Scale | The Self-Administered Patient Satisfaction Scale (SAPS) is defined in 4 questions and measure the patient satisfaction regarding the surgery with a CE marked custom-made implant (ORIGIN®) versus off-the-shelf (VANGUARD PS) device.
The items include patients' overall satisfaction with surgery, the extent of pain relief, the ability to perform home or yard work, and the ability to perform recreational activities. Items are scored on a 4-point Likert scale with response categories consisting of very satisfied (100 points), somewhat satisfied (75 points), somewhat dissatisfied (50 points), and very dissatisfied (25 points). The scale score is the unweighted mean of the scores from the individual items, ranging from 25 to 100 per item (with 100 being most satisfied). |
1 year | |
Primary | The Self-Administered Patient Satisfaction Scale | The Self-Administered Patient Satisfaction Scale (SAPS) is defined in 4 questions and measure the patient satisfaction regarding the surgery with a CE marked custom-made implant (ORIGIN®) versus off-the-shelf (VANGUARD PS) device.
The items include patients' overall satisfaction with surgery, the extent of pain relief, the ability to perform home or yard work, and the ability to perform recreational activities. Items are scored on a 4-point Likert scale with response categories consisting of very satisfied (100 points), somewhat satisfied (75 points), somewhat dissatisfied (50 points), and very dissatisfied (25 points). The scale score is the unweighted mean of the scores from the individual items, ranging from 25 to 100 per item (with 100 being most satisfied). |
2 years | |
Secondary | Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score | The Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome (KOOS) Score is defined in 5 subscales (1.Pain, 2.other Symptoms, 3.Function in daily living (ADL), 4.Function in sport and recreation, and 5.knee related to Quality of life.
Items are scored on 4-points Likert scale. The scale score is the unweighted mean of the scores, ranging from 0 to 100 per item (with 100 indicating no symptoms and 0 indicating extreme symptoms). |
Baseline (preoperative visit) | |
Secondary | Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score | The Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome (KOOS) Score is defined in 5 subscales (1.Pain, 2.other Symptoms, 3.Function in daily living (ADL), 4.Function in sport and recreation, and 5.knee related to Quality of life.
Items are scored on 4-points Likert scale. The scale score is the unweighted mean of the scores, ranging from 0 to 100 per item (with 100 indicating no symptoms and 0 indicating extreme symptoms). |
1 year | |
Secondary | Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score | The Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome (KOOS) Score is defined in 5 subscales (1.Pain, 2.other Symptoms, 3.Function in daily living (ADL), 4.Function in sport and recreation, and 5.knee related to Quality of life.
Items are scored on 4-points Likert scale. The scale score is the unweighted mean of the scores, ranging from 0 to 100 per item (with 100 indicating no symptoms and 0 indicating extreme symptoms). |
2 years | |
Secondary | Complications & revision rate | Pourcentage of complications leading to surgical revision | Baseline (surgery) | |
Secondary | Complications & revision rate | Pourcentage of complications leading to surgical revision | 1 year | |
Secondary | Complications & revision rate | Pourcentage of complications leading to surgical revision | 2 years | |
Secondary | Oxford Knee Score | The Oxford Knee Score (OKS) is 12-items questionnaire designed and developed to assess function and pain after total knee replacement surgery (arthroplasty).
The Items are scored on a 4-point Likert scale. The scale score is the unweighted mean of the scores, ranging from 0 to 48 (with 48 indicating best/least problems and 0 indicating worst/most severe problems). |
baseline (preoperative visit) | |
Secondary | Oxford Knee Score | The Oxford Knee Score (OKS) is 12-items questionnaire designed and developed to assess function and pain after total knee replacement surgery (arthroplasty).
The Items are scored on a 4-point Likert scale. The scale score is the unweighted mean of the scores, ranging from 0 to 48 (with 48 indicating best/least problems and 0 indicating worst/most severe problems). |
1 year | |
Secondary | Oxford Knee Score | The Oxford Knee Score (OKS) is 12-items questionnaire designed and developed to assess function and pain after total knee replacement surgery (arthroplasty).
The Items are scored on a 4-point Likert scale. The scale score is the unweighted mean of the scores, ranging from 0 to 48 (with 48 indicating best/least problems and 0 indicating worst/most severe problems). |
2 years | |
Secondary | EQ-5D-5L Score | The EQ-5D-5L Score is 5-items questionnaire designed and developed to assess the quality of life (1.mobility, 2.self care, 3.usual activities, 4.pain/discomfort, 5.anxiety/depression) The Items are scored on a 5-point Likert scale. The scale score is the weighted mean of the scores, ranging from 0 to 5 dimension (with 0 = no problems, 1 = slight problems, 2 = moderate problems, 3 = severe problems, and 4= extreme problems). | baseline (preoperative visit) | |
Secondary | EQ-5D-5L Score | The EQ-5D-5L Score is 5-items questionnaire designed and developed to assess the quality of life (1.mobility, 2.self care, 3.usual activities, 4.pain/discomfort, 5.anxiety/depression) The Items are scored on a 5-point Likert scale. The scale score is the weighted mean of the scores, ranging from 0 to 5 dimension (with 0 = no problems, 1 = slight problems, 2 = moderate problems, 3 = severe problems, and 4= extreme problems). | 1 year | |
Secondary | EQ-5D-5L Score | The EQ-5D-5L Score is 5-items questionnaire designed and developed to assess the quality of life (1.mobility, 2.self care, 3.usual activities, 4.pain/discomfort, 5.anxiety/depression) The Items are scored on a 5-point Likert scale. The scale score is the weighted mean of the scores, ranging from 0 to 5 dimension (with 0 = no problems, 1 = slight problems, 2 = moderate problems, 3 = severe problems, and 4= extreme problems). | 2 years | |
Secondary | EQ Visual Analog Scale | The EQ Visual Analog Scale (EQ VAS) records the respondent's overall current health of the patient on a vertical visual analogue scale, ranging from 0 to 100 (with 100 indicating the best health you can imagine and 0 indicating the worst health you can imagine. | Baseline (preoperative visit) | |
Secondary | EQ Visual Analog Scale | The EQ Visual Analog Scale (EQ VAS) records the respondent's overall current health of the patient on a vertical visual analogue scale, ranging from 0 to 100 (with 100 indicating the best health you can imagine and 0 indicating the worst health you can imagine. | 1 year | |
Secondary | EQ Visual Analog Scale | The EQ Visual Analog Scale (EQ VAS) records the respondent's overall current health of the patient on a vertical visual analogue scale, ranging from 0 to 100 (with 100 indicating the best health you can imagine and 0 indicating the worst health you can imagine. | 2 years | |
Secondary | Objective Knee Indicators | The Objective Knee Indicators is a knee score which assesses range of motion, stability, and alignment, ranging from 0 to 50 points (with 50 indicating a better outcome and 0 indicating a worse score.
he Objective Knee Indicators is a component of The Knee Society Score (KSS), being a knee joint specific questionnaire originally developed and validated in 1989 for use in assessing the outcome of total knee replacement. |
Baseline (preoperative visit) | |
Secondary | Objective Knee Indicators | The Objective Knee Indicators is a knee score which assesses range of motion, stability, and alignment, ranging from 0 to 50 points (with 50 indicating a better outcome and 0 indicating a worse score.
he Objective Knee Indicators is a component of The Knee Society Score (KSS), being a knee joint specific questionnaire originally developed and validated in 1989 for use in assessing the outcome of total knee replacement. |
1 year | |
Secondary | Objective Knee Indicators | The Objective Knee Indicators is a knee score which assesses range of motion, stability, and alignment, ranging from 0 to 50 points (with 50 indicating a better outcome and 0 indicating a worse score.
he Objective Knee Indicators is a component of The Knee Society Score (KSS), being a knee joint specific questionnaire originally developed and validated in 1989 for use in assessing the outcome of total knee replacement. |
2 years | |
Secondary | Single Leg Stance Test with eyes opened on the right feet | The Single Leg Stance (SLS) Test measures the Time Ability (number of seconds) of the patient to maintain Single Leg Stance with eyes open or closed.
Adults unable to balance on 1 limb for 5 secs had 2.1 times the risk of having an injurious fall than those who could balance for >5 secs. |
Baseline (preoperative visit) | |
Secondary | Single Leg Stance Test with eyes closed on the right feet | The Single Leg Stance (SLS) Test measures the Time Ability (number of seconds) of the patient to maintain Single Leg Stance with eyes open or closed.
Adults unable to balance on 1 limb for 5 secs had 2.1 times the risk of having an injurious fall than those who could balance for >5 secs. |
Baseline (preoperative visit) | |
Secondary | Single Leg Stance Test with eyes opened on the right feet | The Single Leg Stance (SLS) Test measures the Time Ability (number of seconds) of the patient to maintain Single Leg Stance with eyes open or closed.
Adults unable to balance on 1 limb for 5 secs had 2.1 times the risk of having an injurious fall than those who could balance for >5 secs. |
1 year | |
Secondary | Single Leg Stance Test with eyes closed on the right feet | The Single Leg Stance (SLS) Test measures the Time Ability (number of seconds) of the patient to maintain Single Leg Stance with eyes open or closed.
Adults unable to balance on 1 limb for 5 secs had 2.1 times the risk of having an injurious fall than those who could balance for >5 secs. |
1 year | |
Secondary | Single Leg Stance Test with eyes opened on the right feet | The Single Leg Stance (SLS) Test measures the Time Ability (number of seconds) of the patient to maintain Single Leg Stance with eyes open or closed.
Adults unable to balance on 1 limb for 5 secs had 2.1 times the risk of having an injurious fall than those who could balance for >5 secs. |
2 years | |
Secondary | Single Leg Stance Test with eyes closed on the right feet | The Single Leg Stance (SLS) Test measures the Time Ability (number of seconds) of the patient to maintain Single Leg Stance with eyes open or closed.
Adults unable to balance on 1 limb for 5 secs had 2.1 times the risk of having an injurious fall than those who could balance for >5 secs. |
2 years | |
Secondary | Single Leg Stance Test with eyes opened on the left feet | The Single Leg Stance (SLS) Test measures the Time Ability (number of seconds) of the patient to maintain Single Leg Stance with eyes open or closed.
Adults unable to balance on 1 limb for 5 secs had 2.1 times the risk of having an injurious fall than those who could balance for >5 secs. |
Baseline (preoperative visit) | |
Secondary | Single Leg Stance Test with eyes closed on the left feet | The Single Leg Stance (SLS) Test measured the Time Ability (number of seconds) of the patient to maintain Single Leg Stance with eyes open or closed.
Adults unable to balance on 1 limb for 5 secs had 2.1 times the risk of having an injurious fall than those who could balance for >5 secs. |
Baseline (preoperative visit) | |
Secondary | Single Leg Stance Test with eyes opened on the left feet | The Single Leg Stance (SLS) Test measures the Time Ability (number of seconds) of the patient to maintain Single Leg Stance with eyes open or closed.
Adults unable to balance on 1 limb for 5 secs had 2.1 times the risk of having an injurious fall than those who could balance for >5 secs. |
1 year | |
Secondary | Single Leg Stance Test with eyes closed on the left feet | The Single Leg Stance (SLS) Test measures the Time Ability (number of seconds) of the patient to maintain Single Leg Stance with eyes open or closed.
Adults unable to balance on 1 limb for 5 secs had 2.1 times the risk of having an injurious fall than those who could balance for >5 secs. |
1 year | |
Secondary | Single Leg Stance Test with eyes opened on the left feet | The Single Leg Stance (SLS) Test measures the Time Ability (number of seconds) of the patient to maintain Single Leg Stance with eyes open or closed.
Adults unable to balance on 1 limb for 5 secs had 2.1 times the risk of having an injurious fall than those who could balance for >5 secs. |
2 years | |
Secondary | Single Leg Stance Test with eyes closed on the left feet | The Single Leg Stance (SLS) Test measures the Time Ability (number of seconds) of the patient to maintain Single Leg Stance with eyes open or closed.
Adults unable to balance on 1 limb for 5 secs had 2.1 times the risk of having an injurious fall than those who could balance for >5 secs. |
2 years | |
Secondary | Time Up and Go Test to assess the fall risk of the patient | The Time Up and Go (TUG) is used to assess the mobility and the fall risk of the patient.
The test requires the patient to rise from a chair, walk 3.0 m at a comfortable pace to a mark placed on the floor, turn around at the 3.0 m mark, walk back to the starting point, and return to sitting in the chair. The score is the time in second taken by the patient to complete the test (with a time higher than 13.5 seconds indicating a higher risk of fall, and a time equal or less than 13.5 seconds indicating a lower risk of fall). |
Baseline (preoperative visit) | |
Secondary | Time Up and Go Test to assess the fall risk of the patient | The Time Up and Go (TUG) is used to assess the mobility and the fall risk of the patient.
The test requires the patient to rise from a chair, walk 3.0 m at a comfortable pace to a mark placed on the floor, turn around at the 3.0 m mark, walk back to the starting point, and return to sitting in the chair. The score is the time in second taken by the patient to complete the test (with a time higher than 13.5 seconds indicating a higher risk of fall, and a time equal or less than 13.5 seconds indicating a lower risk of fall). |
1 year | |
Secondary | Time Up and Go Test to assess the fall risk of the patient | The Time Up and Go (TUG) is used to assess the mobility and the fall risk of the patient.
The test requires the patient to rise from a chair, walk 3.0 m at a comfortable pace to a mark placed on the floor, turn around at the 3.0 m mark, walk back to the starting point, and return to sitting in the chair. The score is the time in second taken by the patient to complete the test (with a time higher than 13.5 seconds indicating a higher risk of fall, and a time equal or less than 13.5 seconds indicating a lower risk of fall). |
2 years |
Status | Clinical Trial | Phase | |
---|---|---|---|
Not yet recruiting |
NCT06323980 -
INHANCE Stemless Reverse Shoulder IDE
|
N/A | |
Completed |
NCT00762944 -
Total Temporomandibular Joint Replacement System Post Approval Study
|
||
Not yet recruiting |
NCT05015101 -
Evaluation of the Clinical and Radiological Outcome of Uncemented Femoral Stems According to Their Proximal Coating
|
||
Terminated |
NCT02713906 -
Materialise X-ray Knee Guides for Total Knee Arthroplasty
|
N/A | |
Completed |
NCT02554149 -
Radiological Measurement of Femoral Stem Version Using Lateral Decubitus Method: A Prospective Study
|
N/A | |
Recruiting |
NCT02828293 -
Understanding GMK Sphere Implant Tibiofemoral Kinematics by Means of Dynamic Videofluoroscopy
|
||
Completed |
NCT02829866 -
AMIStem-H Radiographic Analysis
|
||
Terminated |
NCT00683267 -
Efficacy and Safety Study of 4975 in Patients Undergoing Total Hip Replacement
|
Phase 2 | |
Completed |
NCT04516239 -
Comparison of Metal on Metal Total Hip Arthroplasty and Metal on Metal Total Hip Resurfacing.
|
Phase 4 | |
Recruiting |
NCT04480320 -
Sonography-guided Pericapsular Never Group Block for Hip Arthroplasty
|
N/A | |
Not yet recruiting |
NCT04906681 -
Implementation of a Rehabilitation Technology in Orthopedic and Neurological Rehabilitation to Increase Therapy Dosage: an Exploratory Study
|
Phase 1/Phase 2 | |
Completed |
NCT04403919 -
Knotless Suture in Revision Total Joint Arthroplasty
|
N/A | |
Completed |
NCT03132831 -
Influence of the Operative Day on the Average Duration of Stay in Primary Hip and Knee Replacements
|
||
Active, not recruiting |
NCT03339557 -
Comparison of Three Knee Replacements
|
N/A | |
Active, not recruiting |
NCT02578446 -
Uncemented Tritanium Compared With Cemented Metal-backed Tibia Components in Total Knee Replacement
|
N/A | |
Not yet recruiting |
NCT00756483 -
Stability Plus - Outcomes From Extended Continuum of Care
|
N/A | |
Terminated |
NCT00364533 -
A Study to Evaluate the Effectiveness and Safety of Tapentadol(CG5503) in the Treatment of Acute Pain After Hip Replacement Surgery Compared With Oxycodone and Placebo Followed by a Voluntary Open-Label Extension For Safety
|
Phase 3 | |
Terminated |
NCT04089371 -
A Post-Market Clinical Evaluation of the ReUnion Reversible Fracture (RFX) System
|
||
Completed |
NCT05248854 -
Effects of Sensorimotor and Core Stabilization Exercises After Total Knee Arthroplasty
|
N/A | |
Not yet recruiting |
NCT02465684 -
Effect of Tourniquet on UKA
|
N/A |