Uncemented Tritanium TKR vs Cemented Triathlon TKR

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

60 participants

Study Classification

INTERVENTIONAL

Study Start Date

2019-10-15

Study Completion Date

2026-06-30

Brief Summary

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

The Study aims to investigate whether there is a clinically important difference in peri-articular bone mineral density (BMD) and trabecular bone score (TBS) between patients undergoing two different types of knee replacement fixation - uncemented Tritanium total knee replacement (TKR) and cemented Triathlon TKR.

Before undertaking a full randomised control trial however, it is necessary to establish that the proposed methodology and approach are feasible. Therefore an internal pilot study will be performed first. This registration is for the internal pilot study.

Related Clinical Trials

Explore similar clinical trials based on study characteristics and research focus.

Uncemented Tritanium Compared With Cemented Metal-backed Tibia Components in Total Knee Replacement

NCT02578446

Arthroplasty Replacement Knee

ACTIVE_NOT_RECRUITING NA

TRabecular Metal Economic and Clinical Knee Trial

NCT04677907

Total Knee Replacement Orthopedics

RECRUITING NA

Cemented vs Cementless TKA

NCT03683992

Knee Osteoarthritis

COMPLETED

Total Knee Arthroplasty (TKA) Cemented Versus Cementless Tibial Prosthesis Study

NCT01041937

Osteoarthritis Post-traumatic Osteoarthritis Rheumatoid Arthritis

COMPLETED NA

Evaluation of Triathlon - A New Total Knee Prosthesis System - RSA Triathlon Cruciate Retaining - Cemented vs. Uncemented

NCT02525601

Arthroplasty, Replacement, Knee

ACTIVE_NOT_RECRUITING NA

Detailed Description

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

There have been many studies published that have shown a reduction in bone density around knee replacements. Exact reasons for this are not fully understood but one theory is that the stresses transmitted to the bone around a new knee replacement do not adequately load the surrounding bone due to the stress shielding effects of the cement. Bone requires itself to be loaded by weight-bearing pressure in order to maintain its density and structural integrity.

A loss of bone density around the knee has potentially significant consequences for patients. The ability of the bone to support the knee replacement may be compromised, potentially leading to subsidence and failure of the joint replacement. Patients are known to be more prone to falls within 1 year of having a TKR in comparison to age matched controls who have not undergone knee replacements. The incidence of falls following knee replacement was shown to be 38% in one study after the first year post-operatively, compared to 24% in non-TKR subjects. A reduction in bone density following TKR also renders patients more prone to aseptic loosening and fracture around the knee replacement with potentially disastrous consequences.

The majority of research seems to demonstrate a loss of BMD around the knee at around 12 months following TKR surgery, with the most significant BMD decrease occurring between the period of 5-12 weeks post-surgery, occurring primarily at the periprosthetic region. Up to 68% of patients have been reported as showing BMD loss after TKR at the distal anterior femur within the first 12 months post-operatively. The possible fracture risk associated with this has been investigated. Women aged ≥ 70 years who have undergone TKR surgery are 1.6 times more likely to have a fracture than younger patients and 2.3 times more likely to suffer a fracture than men.

Bone density is measured by use of Dual X-ray Absorbitometry scans (DEXA). However, DEXA bone density measurement alone provides an incomplete picture of bone strength. DEXA measurement is derived from the bone mineral content (BMC) divided by bone area, but does not account for the distribution of the trabeculae and the structural integrity of the microarchitecture. This has led to the development of a tool called the trabecular bone score (TBS) which is able to differentiate between microarchitectures that exhibit the same density.

Advancement in technology has led to re-designs in uncemented knee replacements. These newer implants are able to withstand torsional stresses that previously would have concerned surgeons who feared implant movement in the early post-operative phase. The development of biologic coatings on to TKR components also means that bony on-growth and thus stability of the knee implant is achieved much more quickly than was previously. Surgeons have become keener to use such uncemented devices and recent research has shown comparable results in terms of patient satisfaction, Oxford Knee Scores and the need for revision surgery between cemented and uncemented devices.

Bone architecture responds to the stresses placed upon it. Theoretically, cementless fixation could help preserve periprosthetic bone stock. In uncemented total knee replacements' weight-bearing loads are transmitted through the prosthesis directly to the surrounding bone as opposed to being dissipated by a layer of cement between the implant and the periprosthetic bone. Other potential benefits of cementless fixation include shorter operating room time, ease of revision, and the elimination of complications associated with cemented fixation, including debridement of the cement and resulting loose fragments. Patterns of wear (osteolysis) can occur in cemented implants, it is hoped that the new generation of highly porous uncemented implants will enable biological bony fixation of the implant, thus providing greater osseous integration and more durable fixation.

If the number of TKR continues to rise as predicted, the economic consequences for the NHS are significant. Further clarity on the potential benefits of one implant over another is required to contribute to our knowledge of best practice and evaluate cost effectiveness.

The Triathlon cemented knee replacement has been used worldwide since 2004. A new version of the implant has been developed, this newer version has the same geometry as the Triathlon TKR but has been designed with a special biological coating which enables it to be used without cement, it is currently in use in the US. We would like to assess the potential of this implant to reduce bone density loss around the knee and to see if this will reduce the risk of bone fracture. At the same time we would like to ensure at least the non-inferiority of the uncemented implant compared to the cemented one both in terms of patient satisfaction, functional ability and improvement. We would also like to evaluate cost effectiveness of the two methods of fixation; to see if the shorter operating time associated with not using cement will result in significant cost saving for the NHS.

Before undertaking a full randomised control trial investigating the above, we would like to establish that the proposed methodology and approach are feasible. Therefore an internal pilot study will be performed first.

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

An internal pilot study comparing 2 different types of knee prosthesis; uncemented vs cemented total knee replacement

Primary Study Purpose

TREATMENT

Blinding Strategy

DOUBLE

Participants Outcome Assessors

The following people will be blinded as to which arm of the study the patient is allocated to:

* The patient
* The statistician who performs the analysis of the results
* The radiographer reporting upon the DXA scan results

Study Groups

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

Uncemented Tritanium Knee Replacement

30 participants will be randomly allocated to receive an uncemented Tritanium total knee replacement.

Group Type EXPERIMENTAL

Tritanium uncemented Total Knee Replacement

Intervention Type PROCEDURE

This will be an internal pilot study in which patients will be blinded and randomly assigned to 1 of 2 arms with 30 patients in each arm. The first arm will receive a Triathlon knee replacement device which is cemented into place. The second arm will receive an uncemented Triathlon Tritanium TKR.

Cemented Triathlon Knee Replacement

30 participants will be randomly allocated to receive standard Triathlon cemented total knee replacements.

Group Type ACTIVE_COMPARATOR

Tritanium uncemented Total Knee Replacement

Intervention Type PROCEDURE

This will be an internal pilot study in which patients will be blinded and randomly assigned to 1 of 2 arms with 30 patients in each arm. The first arm will receive a Triathlon knee replacement device which is cemented into place. The second arm will receive an uncemented Triathlon Tritanium TKR.

Interventions

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

Tritanium uncemented Total Knee Replacement

This will be an internal pilot study in which patients will be blinded and randomly assigned to 1 of 2 arms with 30 patients in each arm. The first arm will receive a Triathlon knee replacement device which is cemented into place. The second arm will receive an uncemented Triathlon Tritanium TKR.

Intervention Type PROCEDURE

Other Intervention Names

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

Triathlon Cemented Total Knee Replacement

Eligibility Criteria

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

Inclusion Criteria

* Patients undergoing primary TKR at the RD+E Hospital
* Patients must have completed a consent form for the study
* Patients must be prepared to comply with the pre and post-operative investigations, attendance schedule and questionnaire schedule of the study
* If the knee for surgery is suitable for standard condylar TKR components
* The diagnosis is of tricompartmental osteoarthritis of the knee
* Aged 50-70 years at time of surgery

Exclusion Criteria

* Refusal to consent to the study
* If the knee for surgery is not suitable for standard condylar TKR.
* Pregnancy
* Prisoners
* A patient known to have substance abuse or psychological disorders that could interfere with their ability to comply with the assessment schedules
* Patients unable to read or understand the patient information leaflet and consent form
* Patients who have a Body Mass Index (BMI) ≥ 38
* Patient has an active or suspected latent infection in or about the affected knee joint at time of study device implantation
* Patient has received any orthopaedic surgical intervention to the lower extremities within the past year or is expected to require any orthopaedic surgical intervention to the lower extremities, other than the TKR to be enrolled in this study, within the next year
* Patient requires bilateral total knee replacements, or has a history of unsuccessful contralateral partial or total knee replacement
* Patient has a neuromuscular or neurosensory deficiency, which limits the ability to evaluate the safety and efficacy of the device
* Patient is diagnosed with a systemic disease (e.g. Lupus Erythematosus) or a metabolic disorder (e.g. Paget's disease) leading to progressive bone deterioration
* Patient is immunologically suppressed or receiving steroids in excess of normal physiological requirements (e.g. \> 30 days)
* Patients currently taking bisphosphonate medication or have taken within the previous 10 years
* The presence of peri-articular cysts evident on the pre-operative x-ray such as could compromise the stability at the bone implant interface if the uncemented component is used
* A past history of tibial or femoral osteotomy surgery

Minimum Eligible Age

50 Years

Maximum Eligible Age

70 Years

Eligible Sex

ALL

Accepts Healthy Volunteers

No