Dual Mobility in "High Risk" Patients

NCT ID: NCT04092634

Last Updated: 2025-06-26

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

PHASE4

Total Enrollment

412 participants

Study Classification

INTERVENTIONAL

Study Start Date

2017-11-01

Study Completion Date

2035-02-01

Brief Summary

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

The aim of this study is to compare clinical outcomes of patients considered to be high risk for prosthetic dislocation undergoing primary total hip arthroplasty (THA) with the use of a dual mobility bearing versus a conventional, single bearing design.

Detailed Description

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

This study aims to compare the clinical outcomes of patients considered to be at high risk for prosthetic dislocation undergoing primary total hip arthroplasty (THA) with the use of a dual mobility bearing versus a conventional, single-bearing design.

We hypothesize that in primary THA patients considered to be at high risk for prosthetic dislocation, the use of dual-mobility components will be associated with a lower dislocation rate in the first year following the index procedure. We do not anticipate a difference. In other clinical outcome measures or functional outcome scores between the two cohorts.

Study Design: Randomized controlled trial with two groups: THA with dual mobility.

44 components vs THA with single-bearing designs

Conditions

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

Dislocation, Hip

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

Randomized controlled trial with two groups: THA with dual mobility components vs THA with single-bearing designs.
Primary Study Purpose

PREVENTION

Blinding Strategy

NONE

Study Groups

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

Dual mobility

Patients in this group will receive a dual mobility hip implant

Group Type EXPERIMENTAL

Dual mobility implant

Intervention Type DEVICE

Patients that are eligible and consent to the study will be randomized to receive either a dual mobility implant or a traditional single-bearing hip implant. This group is for the dual mobility implant

Single bearing, traditional hip implant

Patients in this group will receive a traditional, single-bearing hip implant.

Group Type ACTIVE_COMPARATOR

Traditional, Single-bearing hip implant

Intervention Type DEVICE

Patients that are eligible and consent to the study will be randomized to receive either a dual mobility implant or a traditional single-bearing hip implant. This group is for the dual mobility implant

Interventions

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

Dual mobility implant

Patients that are eligible and consent to the study will be randomized to receive either a dual mobility implant or a traditional single-bearing hip implant. This group is for the dual mobility implant

Intervention Type DEVICE

Traditional, Single-bearing hip implant

Patients that are eligible and consent to the study will be randomized to receive either a dual mobility implant or a traditional single-bearing hip implant. This group is for the dual mobility implant

Intervention Type DEVICE

Eligibility Criteria

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

Inclusion Criteria

* Primary THA for a diagnosis of osteoarthritis or inflammatory arthritis in the setting of a history of prior lumbar or lumbosacral fusion performed at least 6 months prior to their THA. In addition, patients considered high-risk for potential prosthetic dislocation will be included based on the presence of one or more of the following: neuromuscular disorder (e.g. cerebral palsy, Parkinson's disease, history of a stroke), dementia or cognitive impairment, substance or alcohol abuse (\>10 drinks per week), acute displaced femoral neck fracture, age \> 75 years, inflammatory arthritis, and increased preoperative range of motion (calculated as described by Krenzel et al.: combined flexion, adduction, internal rotation \> 115 degrees).

Exclusion Criteria

* Less than 18 years of age
* Revision THA
* spinopelvic fusion that is more recent than 6 months prior to THA
* isolated cervical or thoracic fusion
* intent to undergo a revision spinopelvic fusion within one year of their index THA
* a history of prior infection in the affected hip
* a history of prior open surgery on the affected hip (i.e. prior proximal femur fracture or osteotomy)
* or a preoperative diagnosis of post-traumatic arthritis, avascular necrosis, or fracture
Minimum Eligible Age

18 Years

Eligible Sex

ALL

Accepts Healthy Volunteers

No

Sponsors

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

New York University

OTHER

Sponsor Role collaborator

Rothman Institute Orthopaedics

OTHER

Sponsor Role collaborator

Keck School of Medicine of USC

OTHER

Sponsor Role collaborator

Rush University Medical Center

OTHER

Sponsor Role lead

Responsible Party

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

Responsibility Role SPONSOR

Locations

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

Keck School of Medicine of USC

Los Angeles, California, United States

Site Status

Rush University Medical Center

Chicago, Illinois, United States

Site Status

New York University Medical Center

New York, New York, United States

Site Status

Rothman Orthopaedic Institute

Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, United States

Site Status

Countries

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

United States

Other Identifiers

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

17030101

Identifier Type: -

Identifier Source: org_study_id

More Related Trials

Additional clinical trials that may be relevant based on similarity analysis.

Dual Mobility Cup Versus Unipolar Cup
NCT04685239 NOT_YET_RECRUITING NA