Failure Analysis of Patellofemoral Arthroplasty

Knee Osteoarthritis Clinical Trial

Official title:

Failure Analysis of Patellofemoral Arthroplasty

Clinical Trial Details — Status: Active, not recruiting

Administrative data

• NCT number: NCT04772625
• Other study ID #: PFA_Failure_06
• Status: Active, not recruiting
• Start date: January 1, 2019
• Est. completion date: April 1, 2026

Study information

• Verified date: October 2023
• Source: Rigshospitalet, Denmark
• Contact: n/a
• Is FDA regulated: No
• Study type: Observational

Clinical Trial Summary

The purpose of the retrospective cohort study is 1) to determine preoperative risk factors for revision af patellofemoral arthroplasty, and 2) to provide a detailed description of indications for revision after patellofemoral arthroplasty. All patients operated with patellofemoral arthroplasty in Denmark from January 1, 2008 to December 31, 2015, will be included in the cohort.

Description:

Approx. 11,000 operations with the insertion of a knee arthroplasty (knee prosthesis) are performed annually DK. The durability and quality of the treatment are assessed with prosthesis survival, that expresses the proportion of prostheses that are still functional after a given number of years (eg the 10-year prosthesis survival for all types of knee prostheses in DK is approximately 94%). Unicompartmental implants are increasingly used, so that only the worn part of the knee is replaced. Especially for osteoarthritis between the patella and the femur, a patellofemoral prosthesis (PFA - patellofemoral alloplasty) can be inserted, which is much smaller than the traditional full prosthesis (TKA - total knee arthroplasty). PFA operations are controversial. A recently published Danish study (double-blind RCT) comparing TKA and PFA has shown that PFA patients achieve greater satisfaction, better knee function and greater quality of life than TKA patients. A recent study has also demonstrated that the cost of a PFA procedure is less than that of a TKA. As a paradox to this clear RCT finding, all national implant registers (Sweden, England, New Zealand, Denmark, etc.) show a significantly poorer prosthesis survival for PFA compared with TKA. It is important for the future treatment of patients with severe osteoarthritis between the patella and femur to understand the cause of the discrepancy between RCT and registry results. The discrepancy gives rise to a number of questions regarding. indications, techniques, competences, postoperative regimens etc. The divergence between the RCT and registry studies can only be clarified by a study that 1) examines the influence of preperative factors (patient history, physical findings, radiology etc.) on outcome, and that 2) attempts a causal analysis for each reoperation. The investigators intend to do this though a cohort study including all cases of patellofemoral arthroplasty performed in Denmark from January 1, 2008 until December 31, 2015. The purpose is to determine preoperative risk factors for revision after PFA and to provide a detailed description of indications for revision after PFA.

Recruitment information / eligibility

• Status: Active, not recruiting
• Enrollment: 550
• Est. completion date: April 1, 2026
• Est. primary completion date: November 9, 2022
• Accepts healthy volunteers: No
• Gender: All
• Age group: N/A and older

Eligibility

Inclusion Criteria:

• Patellofemoral arthroplasty
• Primary procedure performed between Jan 1 2008 and Dec 31 2015
• Primary procedure performed in Denmark

Exclusion Criteria:

• Patella-nail syndrome
• Dislocating tendon following patellectomy.

Related Conditions & MeSH terms

• Arthroplasty Complications
• Knee Osteoarthritis
• Osteoarthritis
• Patellofemoral Osteoarthritis

Intervention

Device:
• Patellofemoral arthroplasty
Insertion of an artificial joint between the front of the femur and the back of the patella. The femoral component consists of a metal implant, and the patellar component is a polyethylene implant. The two components replace the original articular cartilage of the patellofemoral joint.

Locations

Country	Name	City	State
Denmark	Rigshospitalet	Copenhagen

Sponsors (2)

Lead Sponsor	Collaborator
Anders Odgaard	Stryker Orthopaedics

Country where clinical trial is conducted

Denmark, 

References & Publications (4)

Bendixen NB, Eskelund PW, Odgaard A. Failure modes of patellofemoral arthroplasty-registries vs. clinical studies: a systematic review. Acta Orthop. 2019 Oct;90(5):473-478. doi: 10.1080/17453674.2019.1634865. Epub 2019 Jul 1. — View Citation

Fredborg C, Odgaard A, Sorensen J. Patellofemoral arthroplasty is cheaper and more effective in the short term than total knee arthroplasty for isolated patellofemoral osteoarthritis: cost-effectiveness analysis based on a randomized trial. Bone Joint J. 2020 Apr;102-B(4):449-457. doi: 10.1302/0301-620X.102B4.BJJ-2018-1580.R3. — View Citation

Odgaard A, Eldridge J, Madsen F. Patellofemoral Arthroplasty. JBJS Essent Surg Tech. 2019 Apr 24;9(2):e15. doi: 10.2106/JBJS.ST.18.00094. eCollection 2019 Jun 26. Erratum In: JBJS Essent Surg Tech. 2020 Jul 09;10(3): — View Citation

Odgaard A, Madsen F, Kristensen PW, Kappel A, Fabrin J. The Mark Coventry Award: Patellofemoral Arthroplasty Results in Better Range of Movement and Early Patient-reported Outcomes Than TKA. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2018 Jan;476(1):87-100. doi: 10.1007/s11999.0000000000000017. — View Citation

Outcome

Type	Measure	Description	Time frame	Safety issue
Primary	Implant revision and reoperation rates	The proportion of revised and reoperated patients	10-year
Secondary	The 6-year cumulative revision rate	The 6-year cumulative revision rate of patellofemoral arthroplasties in a target trial comparing two groups of surgeons: 1) those surgeons, who were a part of a randomised clinical trial comparing PFA and TKA, and 2) other surgeons. In addition to this, the 6-year cumulative reoperation rate (other than revision) and the 6-year cumulative mortality rate will also be reported.	6 years