Bone Mineral Density Changes of the Acetabulum After Revision Hip Arthroplasty Using Bone Impaction Grafting

NCT ID: NCT02061904

Last Updated: 2017-10-04

Study Results

Results pending

The study team has not published outcome measurements, participant flow, or safety data for this trial yet. Check back later for updates.

Basic Information

Get a concise snapshot of the trial, including recruitment status, study phase, enrollment targets, and key timeline milestones.

Recruitment Status

COMPLETED

Clinical Phase

NA

Total Enrollment

20 participants

Study Classification

INTERVENTIONAL

Study Start Date

2014-01-31

Study Completion Date

2017-01-31

Brief Summary

Review the sponsor-provided synopsis that highlights what the study is about and why it is being conducted.

Prospective explorative study for the investigation of short-term and medium-term outcomes regarding bone mineral density changes after revision hip arthroplasty making use of bone impaction grafting. Outcome measurements will include objective and subjective clinical data, complications and adverse events, radiographic data measurements recorded at several postoperative intervals.

Detailed Description

Dive into the extended narrative that explains the scientific background, objectives, and procedures in greater depth.

Hypothesis, open questions and specific aims of the project:

We believe that it is important to gain further insight in the process of bone graft remodeling and the preservation of bone stock after bone impaction grafting.

Radiographs are far from conclusive and CT scan can not be repeated on regular intervals for obvious reasons. Prospective follow-up of the BMD of the bone impaction area will contribute to our further understanding. There is no literature available on BMD changes in the acetabulum after bone impaction grafting.

From our recent experiences with earlier research on BMD in specific ROI in the femoral neck we are motivated to further explore the potential of our DEXA technology and software in the field revision hip arthroplasty.

We hypothesize that BMD changes in the bone impaction grafted acetabulum can be adequately monitored with modern DEXA techniques.

Research Questions are:

1. Will bone impaction grafting of the acetabulum result in a well preserved/remodelled bone stock within 2 years after revision hip arthroplasty?
2. Can changes in BMD be interpreted as representative for the process of bone remodelling in the bone impacted area?

Study design

This trial as described in this protocol is a prospective explorative follow-up study recording the clinical, radiographic data, and bone mineral density data at specific time intervals (preoperative, within 2 weeks postoperative, at 3months, 6months, 1 year and 2 years postoperative). The data will be collected using SPSS (version 20.)

Main objective:

To prospectively assess the BMD at short and medium time intervals in specific ROI as an indicator for the process of bone remodelling and ossification of the bone impaction graft after revision hip arthroplasty..

Secondary Objectives:

Clinical scores (SF-12, Oxford Hip score, VAS pain and VAS satisfaction) will be obtained. Vigilant identification of Adverse Events (AEs) will be maintained throughout the study. Mean changes in clinical scores, over time, will also be tested with repeated measurement statistics. Because clinical success is not always indicative of radiographic success and vice versa, correlations will be made.

Sample size:

Our study concerns an explorative study in twenty patients.

Study duration:

The expected duration of the study is approximately 3 years from the commencement of subject enrollment. Subject enrollment is expected to take 1 year. All subjects will be followed for at least two years after surgery until the last subject achieves two-years follow-up.

Evaluation criteria

The study is designed to evaluate possible clinical, radiographic and bone densitometry differences changes after revision hip arthroplasty.

Evaluation criteria at different follow-up intervals.

A Clinical:
* the patient's own evaluation according to the Oxford Score, Dutch translation validated
* the patient's evaluation of his general health with the SF-12 score , license to validated Dutch translation11
* the patient's degree of pain and satisfaction with the prosthesis and the procedure.

B Radiological:
* X-ray evaluations of implant stability, migration, changing of cup or head angles, radiolucent lines, loosening and osteolysis. X-Rays should preferably be digital, at preoperative, 6 months, 1 year and 2 years.

C. DEXA bone density measurements

\- Bone density measurements will be performed preoperative on the acetabulum on several regions of interests (ROI's) including the bone impaction grafting area. Once this ROI's of the acetabulum has been determined it can be digitalized and saved into the software, subsequently this ROI can be transported 4 days postoperative and at 4 days postoperative, 6 months, 1 year and 2 years.

\- This method has been tested in our earlier resurfacing study and has proved to be reliable and reproducable.

\- An independent radiologist will do the measurements on the DEXA-scan

D Survival after revision hip arthroplasty with bone impaction grafting - According to Kaplan Meiers survival rates.

E Complications and adverse events

\- Early and late complications possibly associated with revision hip arthroplasty and possible relationship with bone impaction grafting and surgical technique.

Conditions

See the medical conditions and disease areas that this research is targeting or investigating.

Disorder of Bone Density and Structure, Unspecified Satisfaction

Study Design

Understand how the trial is structured, including allocation methods, masking strategies, primary purpose, and other design elements.

Allocation Method

NON_RANDOMIZED

Intervention Model

SINGLE_GROUP

Primary Study Purpose

DIAGNOSTIC

Blinding Strategy

NONE

Study Groups

Review each arm or cohort in the study, along with the interventions and objectives associated with them.

Bone Mineral Density

Bone mineral density measurement with "intervention" DEXA at the bone impaction graft site:

DEXA: dual energy X-ray absorptiometry

Group Type OTHER

DEXA: dual energy X-ray absorptiometry

Intervention Type RADIATION

Bone mineral density development measured with dual energy X-ray absorptiometry

Hip function

Hip Function/mobility development:

Harris Hip Score

Group Type OTHER

Harris Hip Score

Intervention Type OTHER

questionnaire for hip function monitoring

pain experience

Pain experiences after surgery in the hip joint VAS-pain

Group Type OTHER

VAS-pain

Intervention Type OTHER

questionnaire for pain monitoring

General Patients Health condition

Patients health condition monitoring: intervention SF12:

Short Form Health Survey 12

Group Type OTHER

Short Form Health Survey 12

Intervention Type OTHER

questionnaire for general health monitoring

Intervention Satisfaction

Patients satisfaction development after the intervention VAS-satisfaction

Group Type OTHER

VAS-satisfaction

Intervention Type OTHER

questionnaire for intervention satisfaction monitoring

Interventions

Learn about the drugs, procedures, or behavioral strategies being tested and how they are applied within this trial.

DEXA: dual energy X-ray absorptiometry

Bone mineral density development measured with dual energy X-ray absorptiometry

Intervention Type RADIATION

Short Form Health Survey 12

questionnaire for general health monitoring

Intervention Type OTHER

VAS-satisfaction

questionnaire for intervention satisfaction monitoring

Intervention Type OTHER

VAS-pain

questionnaire for pain monitoring

Intervention Type OTHER

Harris Hip Score

questionnaire for hip function monitoring

Intervention Type OTHER

Other Intervention Names

Discover alternative or legacy names that may be used to describe the listed interventions across different sources.

Bone Mineral Density measurement SF12 Visual analoge Scale for satisfaction. visual analog scale for pain HHS

Eligibility Criteria

Check the participation requirements, including inclusion and exclusion rules, age limits, and whether healthy volunteers are accepted.

Inclusion Criteria

1. revision hip arthroplasty with acetabular defects eligible for bone impaction grafting
2. Diagnosis: acetabular osteolytic defects after primary total hip arthroplasty, planned for revision hip arthroplasty with bone impaction grafting.
3. Patient is between 35 and 75 years old.
4. Patient is expected to recover completely.
5. Patient is willing and able to come to follow-up examinations.
6. Patient has signed an informed consent.

Exclusion Criteria

1. Infection of the hip joint or distant infection (may cause hematogenous spread to the implant site)
2. Hip fractures
3. Patient is younger than 35 years or older than 75 years.
4. Patient is not willing and/or able to come to follow-up examinations
5. Patient has not signed an informed consent
6. Pregnancy

Relative contra-indications:

With regard to the patient's general health:

1. Metabolic disorders or medication (e.g. steroids) which may impair bone formation
2. Osteomalacia
3. Disorders of the immune system, caused by disease or immunosuppressive medication which increase the risk of infection.
4. Poor prognosis for good wound healing: decubitus ulcer, end-stage diabetes, severe protein deficiency and/or malnutrition
Minimum Eligible Age

35 Years

Maximum Eligible Age

75 Years

Eligible Sex

ALL

Accepts Healthy Volunteers

No

Sponsors

Meet the organizations funding or collaborating on the study and learn about their roles.

Rijnstate Hospital

OTHER

Sponsor Role lead

Responsible Party

Identify the individual or organization who holds primary responsibility for the study information submitted to regulators.

Job van Susante

MD, PhD

Responsibility Role PRINCIPAL_INVESTIGATOR

Principal Investigators

Learn about the lead researchers overseeing the trial and their institutional affiliations.

J v Susante, MD. PhD

Role: PRINCIPAL_INVESTIGATOR

Rijnstate Hospital

Locations

Explore where the study is taking place and check the recruitment status at each participating site.

Rijnstate Hospital

Arnhem, Gelderland, Netherlands

Site Status

Countries

Review the countries where the study has at least one active or historical site.

Netherlands

References

Explore related publications, articles, or registry entries linked to this study.

Smolders JM, Pakvis DF, Hendrickx BW, Verdonschot N, van Susante JL. Periacetabular bone mineral density changes after resurfacing hip arthroplasty versus conventional total hip arthroplasty. A randomized controlled DEXA study. J Arthroplasty. 2013 Aug;28(7):1177-84. doi: 10.1016/j.arth.2012.08.025. Epub 2012 Dec 6.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 23219623 (View on PubMed)

Smolders JM, Hol A, Rijnders T, van Susante JL. Changes in bone mineral density in the proximal femur after hip resurfacing and uncemented total hip replacement: A prospective randomised controlled study. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2010 Nov;92(11):1509-14. doi: 10.1302/0301-620X.92B11.24785.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 21037344 (View on PubMed)

Other Identifiers

Review additional registry numbers or institutional identifiers associated with this trial.

BMD&BIG

Identifier Type: -

Identifier Source: org_study_id