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
ACTIVE_NOT_RECRUITING
Clinical Phase
NA
Total Enrollment
26 participants
Study Classification
INTERVENTIONAL
Study Start Date
2016-11-30
Study Completion Date
2025-12-31
Brief Summary
Review the sponsor-provided synopsis that highlights what the study is about and why it is being conducted.
Total joint replacement is an efficacious treatment for osteoarthritis of hips and knees. Both total knee replacement (TKR) and total hip replacements (THR) have excellent implant survivorship. However, patient satisfaction is lower in TKR than THR. A possible cause of the discrepancy is the unnatural knee kinematics after TKR. Various implant designs have been developed to solve the problem. However, most of the designs are based on experimental data and not on in vivo kinematics. In this study, we will analyze the in vivo kinematics of the Global Medacta Knee Sphere (GMK Sphere) implant and compare it with a well documented design and implant (NexGen Cruciate Retaining (CR), Zimmer Biomet). We assume our study will contribute to the development of more satisfying knee implants.
Related Clinical Trials
Explore similar clinical trials based on study characteristics and research focus.
Stability of Contemporary Knee Arthroplasty
NCT02861794
Knee Osteoarthritis
COMPLETED
NA
Stability of Uncemented Medially Stabilized TKA
NCT04017533
Knee Osteoarthritis
COMPLETED
NA
RSA and Clinical Comparison of Anatomical and Mechanical Alignment in Total Knee Replacement
NCT02256904
Personal Satisfaction
Genu Varum
UNKNOWN
NA
The personalKNEE Trial
NCT06507046
Knee Osteoarthritis
RECRUITING
NA
Minimally Invasive Surgical Approaches In Total Knee Arthroplasty
NCT01461356
Knee Osteoarthritis
COMPLETED
NA
Detailed Description
Dive into the extended narrative that explains the scientific background, objectives, and procedures in greater depth.
Worldwide the number of patients requiring treatment for osteoarthritis is increasing due to increasing obesity, an ageing population and a high demanding younger population. Learmonth describes hip arthroplasty as the "operation of the century" because patients are highly satisfied with pain relief and function after the procedure. Knee arthroplasties have in recent years also shown promising results and have surpassed hip arthroplasty in frequency in western countries. However, patient satisfaction is not as high. Reported problems are insufficient function and persistent pain. On the other hand, knee arthroplasties are increasingly implanted in younger and more active patients who require high function and quality of life. Improvement of results after knee arthroplasty is therefore an urgent issue in the field of orthopaedic research.
Knee kinematics and implant designs:
A possible cause of lower function of replaced knees is the unnatural postoperative knee kinematics. The kinematics of replaced knees are closely related to their function. Studies show that replaced knees with excellent flexion angles have kinematic similarities to normal knees and malalignments of implants can cause postoperative pain.
Compared to the hip joint which is a simple ball-and-socket joint, the kinematics of knee is more complex. Native knee kinematics are a combination of a rolling and gliding motion of the femoral condyles and rotation of the tibia, where roll back of the lateral femoral condyle is larger than medially. Roll back is important for high degrees of flexion. Native knee kinematics are not fully understood, but the anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) seems to be an integral part, as knees without a functioning ACL show decreased roll back. Based on the kinematics of the normal knee joint, various attempts have been made on the design of knee implants to reconstruct normal kinematics after replacement surgery, but in knee osteoarthritis the ACL and posterior cruciate ligament (PCL) is often deficient as they are damaged by inflammation. Therefore, there are three concepts regarding the retaining of these ligaments in knee replacement surgery. 1: Sacrifice both the ACL and PCL, 2: Retain the PCL (cruciate retaining (CR) design), 3: Retain both the ACL and PCL (bicruciate-reataining design).
The function of the cruciate ligaments can be mimicked by different designs of the tibial insert. The CR design has been widely used in the northern countries, especially the Zimmer Biometri NexGen CR implant in Norway. There are migration data for the NexGen implant with high precision measurements available in the literature. However, the NexGen CR implant does not retain the ACL and does not mimic natural knee kinematics.
The tibial insert of the medially stabilized implant design (Medacta International, GMK Sphere) has a constrained medial "ball in socket" joint and at the same time allows lateral anterioposterior movement (roll back). This new design was developed by a group of dedicated researchers. The design intention is to resemble the native kinematics of the knee by mimicing the function of the cruciate ligaments and at the same time allow for lateral anterioposterior movement (rollback). Theoretically, knee implant designs, which retain the function of cruciate ligaments are predicted to have the closest kinematics to normal knees compared to other designs and to have the potential to achieve the highest patient satisfaction.
Analytical Method:
Radiostereometric Analysis (RSA) has been used in orthopedic research fields since 1970s. The original application of this method was for the evaluation of implant migration (i.e. fixation) and polyethylene wear of artificial joints using static X-ray pictures. When combining RSA with fluoroscopy, we get Fluoroscopic Roentgen Stereophotogrammetric Analysis (FRSA), a method with high accuracy and precision. Few implants have been analysed kinematically in vivo. We plan to investigate the knees during in vivo motion and weight-bearing using FRSA.
Purpose of the study:
The aim of this study is to analyse the in vivo kinematics of a medially stabilized knee arthroplasty implant (GMK Sphere) and to compare it with a well known design (Nexgen CR, Zimmer Biomet) by using FRSA.
By using flat panel fluoroscopy, we will document and compare the kinematics of the two implants in all 6 degrees of freedom (DOF).
26 patients will be randomized into two groups, one will receive the NexGen CR prosthesis, the other group the GMK Sphere.
Knee kinematics and implant designs:
A possible cause of lower function of replaced knees is the unnatural postoperative knee kinematics. The kinematics of replaced knees are closely related to their function. Studies show that replaced knees with excellent flexion angles have kinematic similarities to normal knees and malalignments of implants can cause postoperative pain.
Compared to the hip joint which is a simple ball-and-socket joint, the kinematics of knee is more complex. Native knee kinematics are a combination of a rolling and gliding motion of the femoral condyles and rotation of the tibia, where roll back of the lateral femoral condyle is larger than medially. Roll back is important for high degrees of flexion. Native knee kinematics are not fully understood, but the anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) seems to be an integral part, as knees without a functioning ACL show decreased roll back. Based on the kinematics of the normal knee joint, various attempts have been made on the design of knee implants to reconstruct normal kinematics after replacement surgery, but in knee osteoarthritis the ACL and posterior cruciate ligament (PCL) is often deficient as they are damaged by inflammation. Therefore, there are three concepts regarding the retaining of these ligaments in knee replacement surgery. 1: Sacrifice both the ACL and PCL, 2: Retain the PCL (cruciate retaining (CR) design), 3: Retain both the ACL and PCL (bicruciate-reataining design).
The function of the cruciate ligaments can be mimicked by different designs of the tibial insert. The CR design has been widely used in the northern countries, especially the Zimmer Biometri NexGen CR implant in Norway. There are migration data for the NexGen implant with high precision measurements available in the literature. However, the NexGen CR implant does not retain the ACL and does not mimic natural knee kinematics.
The tibial insert of the medially stabilized implant design (Medacta International, GMK Sphere) has a constrained medial "ball in socket" joint and at the same time allows lateral anterioposterior movement (roll back). This new design was developed by a group of dedicated researchers. The design intention is to resemble the native kinematics of the knee by mimicing the function of the cruciate ligaments and at the same time allow for lateral anterioposterior movement (rollback). Theoretically, knee implant designs, which retain the function of cruciate ligaments are predicted to have the closest kinematics to normal knees compared to other designs and to have the potential to achieve the highest patient satisfaction.
Analytical Method:
Radiostereometric Analysis (RSA) has been used in orthopedic research fields since 1970s. The original application of this method was for the evaluation of implant migration (i.e. fixation) and polyethylene wear of artificial joints using static X-ray pictures. When combining RSA with fluoroscopy, we get Fluoroscopic Roentgen Stereophotogrammetric Analysis (FRSA), a method with high accuracy and precision. Few implants have been analysed kinematically in vivo. We plan to investigate the knees during in vivo motion and weight-bearing using FRSA.
Purpose of the study:
The aim of this study is to analyse the in vivo kinematics of a medially stabilized knee arthroplasty implant (GMK Sphere) and to compare it with a well known design (Nexgen CR, Zimmer Biomet) by using FRSA.
By using flat panel fluoroscopy, we will document and compare the kinematics of the two implants in all 6 degrees of freedom (DOF).
26 patients will be randomized into two groups, one will receive the NexGen CR prosthesis, the other group the GMK Sphere.
Conditions
See the medical conditions and disease areas that this research is targeting or investigating.
Knee Osteoarthritis
Study Design
Understand how the trial is structured, including allocation methods, masking strategies, primary purpose, and other design elements.
Allocation Method
RANDOMIZED
Intervention Model
PARALLEL
Prospective, parallel-group, non-blind, randomized clinical study
Primary Study Purpose
TREATMENT
Blinding Strategy
NONE
Non-blind
Study Groups
Review each arm or cohort in the study, along with the interventions and objectives associated with them.
Zimmer Biomet NexGen CR
Patients receive a Zimmer Biomet NexGen Total Knee Replacement
Group Type
ACTIVE_COMPARATOR
Zimmer Biomet NexGen CR
Intervention Type
PROCEDURE
Total Knee Replacement
Medacta International GMK Sphere
Patients receive a Medacta International, GMK Sphere Total Knee Replacement
Group Type
ACTIVE_COMPARATOR
Medacta International GMK Sphere
Intervention Type
PROCEDURE
Total Knee Replacement
Interventions
Learn about the drugs, procedures, or behavioral strategies being tested and how they are applied within this trial.
Zimmer Biomet NexGen CR
Total Knee Replacement
Intervention Type
PROCEDURE
Medacta International GMK Sphere
Total Knee Replacement
Intervention Type
PROCEDURE
Eligibility Criteria
Check the participation requirements, including inclusion and exclusion rules, age limits, and whether healthy volunteers are accepted.
Inclusion Criteria
1\. Patients with knee osteoarthritis
Exclusion Criteria
1. Preoperative severe deformity (Femoro-tibial angle \< 175°or \> 190° measured on a full-length leg image at weight bearing)
2. Preoperative flexion contracture more than 15°
3. Preoperative limited range of motion under anesthetics (less than 110°)
4. Less than 50 or more than 75 years of age at the time of surgery
5. Use of walking aids because of other musculoskeletal and neuromuscular problems
6. Preoperative diagnosis other than osteoarthritis and avascular necrosis (e.g. rheumatoid arthritis, tumors)
7. Revision arthroplasty
8. Obesity with BMI\>35
9. Impaired collateral ligaments
10. Postoperative KOOS score less than 80
11. Malposition of femoral and tibial implants (Internally rotated or more han 10° externally rotated implants will be excluded. The rotation of femoral implant is measured on postoperative CT images in reference to surgical epicondylar line. The rotation of tibial implant is determined according to Berger's measurement)
12. Limb surgery within 3 months before the analysis
13. Postoperative revision surgery due to deep wound infection
2. Preoperative flexion contracture more than 15°
3. Preoperative limited range of motion under anesthetics (less than 110°)
4. Less than 50 or more than 75 years of age at the time of surgery
5. Use of walking aids because of other musculoskeletal and neuromuscular problems
6. Preoperative diagnosis other than osteoarthritis and avascular necrosis (e.g. rheumatoid arthritis, tumors)
7. Revision arthroplasty
8. Obesity with BMI\>35
9. Impaired collateral ligaments
10. Postoperative KOOS score less than 80
11. Malposition of femoral and tibial implants (Internally rotated or more han 10° externally rotated implants will be excluded. The rotation of femoral implant is measured on postoperative CT images in reference to surgical epicondylar line. The rotation of tibial implant is determined according to Berger's measurement)
12. Limb surgery within 3 months before the analysis
13. Postoperative revision surgery due to deep wound infection
Minimum Eligible Age
50 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.
Helse More and Romsdal Trust
UNKNOWN
Sponsor Role
collaborator
Oslo University Hospital
OTHER
Sponsor Role
lead
Responsible Party
Identify the individual or organization who holds primary responsibility for the study information submitted to regulators.
Stephan M Rohrl
PhD, MD, orthopaedic consultant
Responsibility Role
PRINCIPAL_INVESTIGATOR
Principal Investigators
Learn about the lead researchers overseeing the trial and their institutional affiliations.
Frank-David Oehrn, MD
Role: PRINCIPAL_INVESTIGATOR
CIRRO and Kristiansund Hospital, Helse More and Romsdal Trust
Stephan Maximillian Røhrl, PhD
Role: STUDY_DIRECTOR
CIRRO and Oslo University Hospital, Ullevål
Lars Harald William Engseth, MD
Role: PRINCIPAL_INVESTIGATOR
CIRRO and Oslo University Hospital, Ullevål
Locations
Explore where the study is taking place and check the recruitment status at each participating site.
Oslo University Hospital, Ullevål
Oslo, , Norway
Site Status
Countries
Review the countries where the study has at least one active or historical site.
Norway
References
Explore related publications, articles, or registry entries linked to this study.
Kurtz S, Ong K, Lau E, Mowat F, Halpern M. Projections of primary and revision hip and knee arthroplasty in the United States from 2005 to 2030. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2007 Apr;89(4):780-5. doi: 10.2106/JBJS.F.00222.
Reference Type
BACKGROUND
Kurtz SM, Lau E, Ong K, Zhao K, Kelly M, Bozic KJ. Future young patient demand for primary and revision joint replacement: national projections from 2010 to 2030. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2009 Oct;467(10):2606-12. doi: 10.1007/s11999-009-0834-6. Epub 2009 Apr 10.
Reference Type
BACKGROUND
Learmonth ID, Young C, Rorabeck C. The operation of the century: total hip replacement. Lancet. 2007 Oct 27;370(9597):1508-19. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(07)60457-7.
Reference Type
BACKGROUND
Dieppe P, Lim K, Lohmander S. Who should have knee joint replacement surgery for osteoarthritis? Int J Rheum Dis. 2011 May;14(2):175-80. doi: 10.1111/j.1756-185X.2011.01611.x.
Reference Type
BACKGROUND
Carr AJ, Robertsson O, Graves S, Price AJ, Arden NK, Judge A, Beard DJ. Knee replacement. Lancet. 2012 Apr 7;379(9823):1331-40. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(11)60752-6. Epub 2012 Mar 6.
Reference Type
BACKGROUND
Hawker GA, Badley EM, Borkhoff CM, Croxford R, Davis AM, Dunn S, Gignac MA, Jaglal SB, Kreder HJ, Sale JE. Which patients are most likely to benefit from total joint arthroplasty? Arthritis Rheum. 2013 May;65(5):1243-52. doi: 10.1002/art.37901.
Reference Type
BACKGROUND
Wylde V, Jeffery A, Dieppe P, Gooberman-Hill R. The assessment of persistent pain after joint replacement. Osteoarthritis Cartilage. 2012 Feb;20(2):102-5. doi: 10.1016/j.joca.2011.11.011. Epub 2011 Nov 30.
Reference Type
BACKGROUND
Ravi B, Croxford R, Reichmann WM, Losina E, Katz JN, Hawker GA. The changing demographics of total joint arthroplasty recipients in the United States and Ontario from 2001 to 2007. Best Pract Res Clin Rheumatol. 2012 Oct;26(5):637-47. doi: 10.1016/j.berh.2012.07.014.
Reference Type
BACKGROUND
Ibrahim T, Bloch B, Esler CN, Abrams KR, Harper WM. Temporal trends in primary total hip and knee arthroplasty surgery: results from a UK regional joint register, 1991-2004. Ann R Coll Surg Engl. 2010 Apr;92(3):231-5. doi: 10.1308/003588410X12628812458572. Epub 2010 Mar 10.
Reference Type
BACKGROUND
Watanabe T, Ishizuki M, Muneta T, Banks SA. Knee kinematics in anterior cruciate ligament-substituting arthroplasty with or without the posterior cruciate ligament. J Arthroplasty. 2013 Apr;28(4):548-52. doi: 10.1016/j.arth.2012.06.030. Epub 2012 Oct 31.
Reference Type
BACKGROUND
Bell SW, Young P, Drury C, Smith J, Anthony I, Jones B, Blyth M, McLean A. Component rotational alignment in unexplained painful primary total knee arthroplasty. Knee. 2014 Jan;21(1):272-7. doi: 10.1016/j.knee.2012.09.011. Epub 2012 Nov 7.
Reference Type
BACKGROUND
Smith PN, Refshauge KM, Scarvell JM. Development of the concepts of knee kinematics. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2003 Dec;84(12):1895-902. doi: 10.1016/s0003-9993(03)00281-8.
Reference Type
BACKGROUND
Chalidis BE, Sachinis NP, Papadopoulos P, Petsatodis E, Christodoulou AG, Petsatodis G. Long-term results of posterior-cruciate-retaining Genesis I total knee arthroplasty. J Orthop Sci. 2011 Nov;16(6):726-31. doi: 10.1007/s00776-011-0152-1. Epub 2011 Sep 10.
Reference Type
BACKGROUND
Font-Rodriguez DE, Scuderi GR, Insall JN. Survivorship of cemented total knee arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1997 Dec;(345):79-86.
Reference Type
BACKGROUND
Sabouret P, Lavoie F, Cloutier JM. Total knee replacement with retention of both cruciate ligaments: a 22-year follow-up study. Bone Joint J. 2013 Jul;95-B(7):917-22. doi: 10.1302/0301-620X.95B7.30904.
Reference Type
BACKGROUND
Price AJ, Waite JC, Svard U. Long-term clinical results of the medial Oxford unicompartmental knee arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2005 Jun;(435):171-80. doi: 10.1097/00003086-200506000-00024.
Reference Type
BACKGROUND
Malchau H. Introducing new technology: a stepwise algorithm. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2000 Feb 1;25(3):285. doi: 10.1097/00007632-200002010-00004. No abstract available.
Reference Type
BACKGROUND
Malchau H, Bragdon CR, Muratoglu OK. The stepwise introduction of innovation into orthopedic surgery: the next level of dilemmas. J Arthroplasty. 2011 Sep;26(6):825-31. doi: 10.1016/j.arth.2010.08.007. Epub 2010 Oct 2.
Reference Type
BACKGROUND
Gao F, Henricson A, Nilsson KG. Cemented versus uncemented fixation of the femoral component of the NexGen CR total knee replacement in patients younger than 60 years: a prospective randomised controlled RSA study. Knee. 2009 Jun;16(3):200-6. doi: 10.1016/j.knee.2008.11.009. Epub 2008 Dec 19.
Reference Type
BACKGROUND
Iwaki H, Pinskerova V, Freeman MA. Tibiofemoral movement 1: the shapes and relative movements of the femur and tibia in the unloaded cadaver knee. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2000 Nov;82(8):1189-95. doi: 10.1302/0301-620x.82b8.10717.
Reference Type
BACKGROUND
Pinskerova V, Johal P, Nakagawa S, Sosna A, Williams A, Gedroyc W, Freeman MA. Does the femur roll-back with flexion? J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2004 Aug;86(6):925-31. doi: 10.1302/0301-620x.86b6.14589.
Reference Type
BACKGROUND
Pinskerova V, Samuelson KM, Stammers J, Maruthainar K, Sosna A, Freeman MA. The knee in full flexion: an anatomical study. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2009 Jun;91(6):830-4. doi: 10.1302/0301-620X.91B6.22319.
Reference Type
BACKGROUND
Nakagawa S, Kadoya Y, Todo S, Kobayashi A, Sakamoto H, Freeman MA, Yamano Y. Tibiofemoral movement 3: full flexion in the living knee studied by MRI. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2000 Nov;82(8):1199-200. doi: 10.1302/0301-620x.82b8.10718.
Reference Type
BACKGROUND
Freeman MA, Pinskerova V. The movement of the knee studied by magnetic resonance imaging. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2003 May;(410):35-43. doi: 10.1097/01.blo.0000063598.67412.0d.
Reference Type
BACKGROUND
Freeman MA, Pinskerova V. The movement of the normal tibio-femoral joint. J Biomech. 2005 Feb;38(2):197-208. doi: 10.1016/j.jbiomech.2004.02.006.
Reference Type
BACKGROUND
Pijls BG, Valstar ER, Nouta KA, Plevier JW, Fiocco M, Middeldorp S, Nelissen RG. Early migration of tibial components is associated with late revision: a systematic review and meta-analysis of 21,000 knee arthroplasties. Acta Orthop. 2012 Dec;83(6):614-24. doi: 10.3109/17453674.2012.747052. Epub 2012 Nov 9.
Reference Type
BACKGROUND
van Ijsseldijk EA, Lebel B, Stoel BC, Valstar ER, Gouzy S, Vielpeau C, Kaptein BL. Validation of the in vivo volumetric wear measurement for total knee prostheses in model-based RSA. J Biomech. 2013 Apr 26;46(7):1387-91. doi: 10.1016/j.jbiomech.2013.02.021. Epub 2013 Mar 26.
Reference Type
BACKGROUND
Other Identifiers
Review additional registry numbers or institutional identifiers associated with this trial.
424444-2
Identifier Type: -
Identifier Source: org_study_id
More Related Trials
Additional clinical trials that may be relevant based on similarity analysis.
The Effect of Three Prosthesis Designs in Total Knee Arthroplasty
NCT03059927
UNKNOWN
NA
Total Knee Arthroplasty: Relation Between Patient Satisfaction and Implant Geometry
NCT02663804
COMPLETED
NA
Comparison of Restricted Versus Unrestricted Kinematic Alignment in 1ry TKA
NCT06726993
NOT_YET_RECRUITING
NA
Sagittal Knee Kinematics of Transtibial Amputee with Running Blade
NCT06586762
COMPLETED
Clinical Outcome and OR Resource Use of Total Knee Arthroplasty Using Patient-Specific or Conventional Instrumentation
NCT04114201
COMPLETED
NA
Fluoroscopic Analysis of Total Knee Replacement With a Kinematic Retaining or a Posterior Stabilized Design
NCT02706990
COMPLETED
NA
Comparison of the in Vivo Stability of 2 Cementless TKA Designs
NCT05651009
ACTIVE_NOT_RECRUITING
NA
Total Knee Arthroplasty: Functional and Clinical Outcomes
NCT01811563
COMPLETED
NA
Comparative Effect of Mechanical and Functional Alignment in Bilateral Total Knee Arthroplasty on Ankle Alignment
NCT06259032
COMPLETED
NA
Patellar Resurfacing in Total Knee Arthroplasty Leads to Better Isokinetic Performance and Higher Clinical Scores
NCT04637490
COMPLETED
NA
A Functional Comparison of Two TKR Designs
NCT03618771
COMPLETED
NA
Kinematic- Versus Ligament-balanced Mechanical Alignment in TKA
NCT04436211
UNKNOWN
The Effects of a Tourniquet in Total Knee Arthroplasty.
NCT03666598
UNKNOWN
NA
Comparison of Functional Outcomes of Three Surgical Approaches in Knee Arthroplasty
NCT00983762
TERMINATED
Comprehensive Assessment of the Musculoskeletal System
NCT02156011
COMPLETED
Understanding GMK Sphere Implant Tibiofemoral Kinematics by Means of Dynamic Videofluoroscopy
NCT03041857
COMPLETED
Comparison of Anatomically Aligned and Conventional Total Knee Arthroplasty in the Same Patients
NCT04181216
UNKNOWN
NA
Patient-specific Instruments as a Standard Procedure in Total Knee Arthroplasty
NCT01781598
COMPLETED
Total Knee Arthroplasty: Comparison of Fixed and Mobile Bearings
NCT00417859
COMPLETED
NA
Assessment With Gait Analysis of Robotic Total Knee Arthroplasty Using Inverse Kinematic Alignment
NCT04912973
UNKNOWN
NA
Inflammatory Response Conventional Total Knee Replacement Versus Mako Total Knee Replacement
NCT04192006
COMPLETED
NA
Matched Pair Study - Kinematic Vs Mechanical Alignment
NCT03446391
COMPLETED
Anterior Knee Pain in Mobile Bearing Versus Fixed Bearing in TKA
NCT05696418
COMPLETED
NA
Comparison of Proprioception for HTO (High Tibial Osteotomy) and UKA (Unicompartmantal Knee Arthroplasty)
NCT05993637
UNKNOWN
Motion Analysis of EMP Knee Versus Posterior Stabilized Knee Arthroplasty for Osteoarthritis
NCT00967161
COMPLETED
NA