Study Results
Outcome measurements, participant flow, baseline characteristics, and adverse events have been published for this study.
View full resultsBasic Information
Get a concise snapshot of the trial, including recruitment status, study phase, enrollment targets, and key timeline milestones.
COMPLETED
NA
40 participants
INTERVENTIONAL
2019-04-08
2020-08-01
Brief Summary
Review the sponsor-provided synopsis that highlights what the study is about and why it is being conducted.
Related Clinical Trials
Explore similar clinical trials based on study characteristics and research focus.
Cup Position in THA With Standard Instruments
NCT03189303
Assess the Mid-term Performance of the Mpact Cup in Subjects Requiring Total Hip Arthroplasty
NCT03897595
CT-based 3D Planning, Computer Navigation and Subsequent Migration Analysis in Total Hip Arthroplasty
NCT05159206
Observational Study Evaluating Outcomes of Hip Arthroplasty Using Tornier Dual Mobility Acetabular Cup
NCT02062450
Multicenter Study for Robotic Arm-assisted THA 4.0 System: Hip Spine Relationship
NCT04646096
Detailed Description
Dive into the extended narrative that explains the scientific background, objectives, and procedures in greater depth.
This objective of this study is to examine the acetabular cup placement of THA patients and compare results for patients who undergo THA with robotic-arm assistance with those who undergo traditional THA.
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
NONE
Study Groups
Review each arm or cohort in the study, along with the interventions and objectives associated with them.
Control
Traditional THA.
No interventions assigned to this group
Intervention
Robotic-arm assisted THA.
Robotic-Arm Assisted THA
The study will examine the acetabular cup placement of THA patients and compare results for patients who undergo THA with robotic-arm assistance with those who undergo traditional THA.
Interventions
Learn about the drugs, procedures, or behavioral strategies being tested and how they are applied within this trial.
Robotic-Arm Assisted THA
The study will examine the acetabular cup placement of THA patients and compare results for patients who undergo THA with robotic-arm assistance with those who undergo traditional THA.
Eligibility Criteria
Check the participation requirements, including inclusion and exclusion rules, age limits, and whether healthy volunteers are accepted.
Inclusion Criteria
2. Patients willing and able to comply with follow-up requirements
3. Patients willing to sign an Institutional Review Board approved informed consent form.
Exclusion Criteria
2. Patients who are \<18 years of age
3. Patients with an active infection or suspected latent infection in or about the hip joint
4. Bone stock that is inadequate for support or fixation of the prosthesis
5. Previous major hip surgery excluding hip arthroscopy
6. Total hip arthroplasty using cement fixation or resurfacing
18 Years
ALL
Yes
Sponsors
Meet the organizations funding or collaborating on the study and learn about their roles.
Stryker Nordic
INDUSTRY
West Penn Allegheny Health System
OTHER
West Virginia University
OTHER
Responsible Party
Identify the individual or organization who holds primary responsibility for the study information submitted to regulators.
Matthew Dietz, MD
Associate Professor, Chair
Principal Investigators
Learn about the lead researchers overseeing the trial and their institutional affiliations.
Matthew J Dietz, MD
Role: PRINCIPAL_INVESTIGATOR
West Virginia University
Locations
Explore where the study is taking place and check the recruitment status at each participating site.
WVU Medicine
Morgantown, West Virginia, United States
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.
Banerjee S, Cherian JJ, Elmallah RK, Pierce TP, Jauregui JJ, Mont MA. Robot-assisted total hip arthroplasty. Expert Rev Med Devices. 2016;13(1):47-56. doi: 10.1586/17434440.2016.1124018. Epub 2015 Dec 21.
Elson L, Dounchis J, Illgen R, Marchand RC, Padgett DE, Bragdon CR, Malchau H. Precision of acetabular cup placement in robotic integrated total hip arthroplasty. Hip Int. 2015 Nov-Dec;25(6):531-6. doi: 10.5301/hipint.5000289. Epub 2015 Sep 10.
Kanawade V, Dorr LD, Banks SA, Zhang Z, Wan Z. Precision of robotic guided instrumentation for acetabular component positioning. J Arthroplasty. 2015 Mar;30(3):392-7. doi: 10.1016/j.arth.2014.10.021. Epub 2014 Oct 22.
Werner SD, Stonestreet M, Jacofsky DJ. Makoplasty and the accuracy and efficacy of robotic-assisted arthroplasty. Surg Technol Int. 2014 Mar;24:302-6.
Tarwala R, Dorr LD. Robotic assisted total hip arthroplasty using the MAKO platform. Curr Rev Musculoskelet Med. 2011 Sep;4(3):151-6. doi: 10.1007/s12178-011-9086-7.
Callanan MC, Jarrett B, Bragdon CR, Zurakowski D, Rubash HE, Freiberg AA, Malchau H. The John Charnley Award: risk factors for cup malpositioning: quality improvement through a joint registry at a tertiary hospital. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2011 Feb;469(2):319-29. doi: 10.1007/s11999-010-1487-1.
Woo RY, Morrey BF. Dislocations after total hip arthroplasty. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1982 Dec;64(9):1295-306.
Lewinnek GE, Lewis JL, Tarr R, Compere CL, Zimmerman JR. Dislocations after total hip-replacement arthroplasties. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1978 Mar;60(2):217-20.
Domb BG, El Bitar YF, Sadik AY, Stake CE, Botser IB. Comparison of robotic-assisted and conventional acetabular cup placement in THA: a matched-pair controlled study. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2014 Jan;472(1):329-36. doi: 10.1007/s11999-013-3253-7. Epub 2013 Aug 29.
Banerjee S, Cherian JJ, Elmallah RK, Jauregui JJ, Pierce TP, Mont MA. Robotic-assisted knee arthroplasty. Expert Rev Med Devices. 2015;12(6):727-35. doi: 10.1586/17434440.2015.1086264. Epub 2015 Sep 12.
Roche M. Robotic-assisted unicompartmental knee arthroplasty: the MAKO experience. Orthop Clin North Am. 2015 Jan;46(1):125-31. doi: 10.1016/j.ocl.2014.09.008.
Soong M, Rubash HE, Macaulay W. Dislocation after total hip arthroplasty. J Am Acad Orthop Surg. 2004 Sep-Oct;12(5):314-21. doi: 10.5435/00124635-200409000-00006.
Pellicci PM, Bostrom M, Poss R. Posterior approach to total hip replacement using enhanced posterior soft tissue repair. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1998 Oct;(355):224-8. doi: 10.1097/00003086-199810000-00023.
Ghelman B, Kepler CK, Lyman S, Della Valle AG. CT outperforms radiography for determination of acetabular cup version after THA. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2009 Sep;467(9):2362-70. doi: 10.1007/s11999-009-0774-1. Epub 2009 Mar 10.
Redmond JM, Gupta A, Hammarstedt JE, Petrakos A, Stake CE, Domb BG. Accuracy of Component Placement in Robotic-Assisted Total Hip Arthroplasty. Orthopedics. 2016 May 1;39(3):193-9. doi: 10.3928/01477447-20160404-06. Epub 2016 Apr 12.
El Bitar YF, Stone JC, Jackson TJ, Lindner D, Stake CE, Domb BG. Leg-Length Discrepancy After Total Hip Arthroplasty: Comparison of Robot-Assisted Posterior, Fluoroscopy-Guided Anterior, and Conventional Posterior Approaches. Am J Orthop (Belle Mead NJ). 2015 Jun;44(6):265-9.
Gupta A, Redmond JM, Hammarstedt JE, Petrakos AE, Vemula SP, Domb BG. Does Robotic-Assisted Computer Navigation Affect Acetabular Cup Positioning in Total Hip Arthroplasty in the Obese Patient? A Comparison Study. J Arthroplasty. 2015 Dec;30(12):2204-7. doi: 10.1016/j.arth.2015.06.062. Epub 2015 Jul 2.
Bukowski BR, Anderson P, Khlopas A, Chughtai M, Mont MA, Illgen RL 2nd. Improved Functional Outcomes with Robotic Compared with Manual Total Hip Arthroplasty. Surg Technol Int. 2016 Oct 26;29:303-308.
Kamara E, Robinson J, Bas MA, Rodriguez JA, Hepinstall MS. Adoption of Robotic vs Fluoroscopic Guidance in Total Hip Arthroplasty: Is Acetabular Positioning Improved in the Learning Curve? J Arthroplasty. 2017 Jan;32(1):125-130. doi: 10.1016/j.arth.2016.06.039. Epub 2016 Jun 29.
Provided Documents
Download supplemental materials such as informed consent forms, study protocols, or participant manuals.
Document Type: Study Protocol and Statistical Analysis Plan
Document Type: Informed Consent Form
Other Identifiers
Review additional registry numbers or institutional identifiers associated with this trial.
1808218345
Identifier Type: -
Identifier Source: org_study_id
More Related Trials
Additional clinical trials that may be relevant based on similarity analysis.