Hybrid Versus Cemented TKA Using the NexGen LPS Prosthesis
NCT ID: NCT02798432
Last Updated: 2018-08-02
Study Results
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.
ACTIVE_NOT_RECRUITING
NA
200 participants
INTERVENTIONAL
2015-06-30
2026-12-31
Brief Summary
Review the sponsor-provided synopsis that highlights what the study is about and why it is being conducted.
As TKA became increasingly successful, younger patients increasingly became eligible. Increasing life expectancy has raised the concern that cemented TKAs may not withstand prolonged use, particularly in younger patients4. Patients younger than 65 years are projected to account for more than 50% of patients undergoing TKA by 2016 and to more than 50% of patients undergoing revision surgery by 2011. The number of total knee revisions in the United States is expected to increase from 38,300 in 2005 to 268,200 in 20305.
Many authors have reported excellent and equivalent results of cemented and cementless TKA6-8. Despite these encouraging reports, the major concern with cementless TKA has been the tibial component, and, therefore, the preference for many surgeons still remains to cement the tibial component9,10. The femoral component may be the most suitable for cementless fixation11-13. However, the best femoral method of fixation is still being discussed. Currently, the decision to cement or not to cement the femoral component is based on the surgeon's preference14.
The current study was designed to compare the hybrid NexGen LPS (Zimmer Inc, Warsaw, IN) and the cemented NexGen LPS. The purpose of this study is to establish whether the hybrid NexGen LPS leads to equally successful results as the cemented TKA gold standard
Related Clinical Trials
Explore similar clinical trials based on study characteristics and research focus.
All Polyethylene Versus Metal Backed Tibial Components in Knee Replacement
NCT02482493
Comparison of Pivotal Medial Polyethylene Versus Ultra-congruent in Total Knee Arthroplasty
NCT06676189
Cemented Versus Uncemented Total Knee Arthroplasty : a Prospective Randomized Study
NCT02355652
Total Knee Arthroplasty (TKA) Cemented Versus Cementless
NCT00132587
A Comparison of Anatomically Aligned Versus Conventional in Unilateral Total Knee Arthroplasty
NCT04181528
Detailed Description
Dive into the extended narrative that explains the scientific background, objectives, and procedures in greater depth.
Conditions
See the medical conditions and disease areas that this research is targeting or investigating.
Study Design
Understand how the trial is structured, including allocation methods, masking strategies, primary purpose, and other design elements.
RANDOMIZED
PARALLEL
TREATMENT
DOUBLE
Study Groups
Review each arm or cohort in the study, along with the interventions and objectives associated with them.
Hybrid NEXGEN LPS
Noncemented femoral component with cemented tibial component with the NexGen LPS Total Knee Arthroplasty
Total knee arthroplasty
Use of an uncemented femoral component or a cemented femoral component randomly assigned.
NEXGEN LPS total knee arthroplasty
Hybrid (non cemented femoral component, cemented tibial component) NEXGEN LPS total knee arthroplasty versus Cemented NEXGEN LPS total knee arthroplasty (both components are cemented).
Cemented NEXGEN LPS
Cemented femoral component with cemented tibial component with the NexGen LPS Total Knee Arthroplasty
Total knee arthroplasty
Use of an uncemented femoral component or a cemented femoral component randomly assigned.
NEXGEN LPS total knee arthroplasty
Hybrid (non cemented femoral component, cemented tibial component) NEXGEN LPS total knee arthroplasty versus Cemented NEXGEN LPS total knee arthroplasty (both components are cemented).
Interventions
Learn about the drugs, procedures, or behavioral strategies being tested and how they are applied within this trial.
Total knee arthroplasty
Use of an uncemented femoral component or a cemented femoral component randomly assigned.
NEXGEN LPS total knee arthroplasty
Hybrid (non cemented femoral component, cemented tibial component) NEXGEN LPS total knee arthroplasty versus Cemented NEXGEN LPS total knee arthroplasty (both components are cemented).
Eligibility Criteria
Check the participation requirements, including inclusion and exclusion rules, age limits, and whether healthy volunteers are accepted.
Inclusion Criteria
* Patient is able to provide informed consent.
* Patient is between 18 and 75 years of age.
* Patients are willing and able to attend all follow-up visits and complete all study requirements. They must agree to comply with all study related procedure, including understanding and adhering to the rehabilitation protocol.
* Patient has primary or secondary knee osteoarthritis.
* Patient has sufficient bone quality for total knee arthroplasty.
* Patient is in stable health.
* Female patients are not pregnant at times of surgery and do not plan on becoming pregnant during the study.
Note: patient can only enter the project with one knee
Exclusion Criteria
* Patients with osteoporosis based on former diagnosis or preoperative DEXA-scan.
* Fracture sequelae or previous HTO or previous extensive knee surgery.
* Patients with need of a stem-elongation.
* Patients who cannot refrain from taking NSAID post-operatively.
* Patients with metabolic bone disease.
* Patients with renal disease.
* Patients with rheumatoid arthritis.
* Postmenopausal women in estrogenic hormone substitution
* Patients with a continuous need of systemic cortisone treatment.
* Non-Spanish citizenship.
* Patients who do not comprehend the Spanish language (read and speak).
* Senile dementia.
* Alcohol abuse - defined as men drinking more than 21 units a week and women drinking more than 14 units a week.
* Drug abuse.
* Major psychiatric disease.
* Metastatic cancer disease and treatment with radiation therapy or chemotherapy
18 Years
75 Years
ALL
No
Sponsors
Meet the organizations funding or collaborating on the study and learn about their roles.
Jesus Moreta Suarez
OTHER_GOV
Responsible Party
Identify the individual or organization who holds primary responsibility for the study information submitted to regulators.
Jesus Moreta Suarez
MD, FEBOT
Principal Investigators
Learn about the lead researchers overseeing the trial and their institutional affiliations.
Jesus Moreta, MD, FEBOT
Role: PRINCIPAL_INVESTIGATOR
Hospital Galdakao-Usansolo
Locations
Explore where the study is taking place and check the recruitment status at each participating site.
Hospital Galdakao-Usansolo
Galdakao, Bizkaia, Spain
Countries
Review the countries where the study has at least one active or historical site.
References
Explore related publications, articles, or registry entries linked to this study.
Nilsson KG, Karrholm J, Carlsson L, Dalen T. Hydroxyapatite coating versus cemented fixation of the tibial component in total knee arthroplasty: prospective randomized comparison of hydroxyapatite-coated and cemented tibial components with 5-year follow-up using radiostereometry. J Arthroplasty. 1999 Jan;14(1):9-20. doi: 10.1016/s0883-5403(99)90196-1.
Carlsson A, Bjorkman A, Besjakov J, Onsten I. Cemented tibial component fixation performs better than cementless fixation: a randomized radiostereometric study comparing porous-coated, hydroxyapatite-coated and cemented tibial components over 5 years. Acta Orthop. 2005 Jun;76(3):362-9.
Huddleston JI, Wiley JW, Scott RD. Zone 4 femoral radiolucent lines in hybrid versus cemented total knee arthroplasties: are they clinically significant? Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2005 Dec;441:334-9. doi: 10.1097/01.blo.0000180452.11048.b8.
Uvehammer J, Karrholm J, Carlsson L. Cemented versus hydroxyapatite fixation of the femoral component of the Freeman-Samuelson total knee replacement: a radiostereometric analysis. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2007 Jan;89(1):39-44. doi: 10.1302/0301-620X.89B1.17974.
Illgen R, Tueting J, Enright T, Schreibman K, McBeath A, Heiner J. Hybrid total knee arthroplasty: a retrospective analysis of clinical and radiographic outcomes at average 10 years follow-up. J Arthroplasty. 2004 Oct;19(7 Suppl 2):95-100. doi: 10.1016/j.arth.2004.06.022.
Dunbar MJ, Wilson DA, Hennigar AW, Amirault JD, Gross M, Reardon GP. Fixation of a trabecular metal knee arthroplasty component. A prospective randomized study. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2009 Jul;91(7):1578-86. doi: 10.2106/JBJS.H.00282.
Other Identifiers
Review additional registry numbers or institutional identifiers associated with this trial.
CSE2013-07K
Identifier Type: -
Identifier Source: org_study_id
More Related Trials
Additional clinical trials that may be relevant based on similarity analysis.