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.
COMPLETED
18 participants
OBSERVATIONAL
2023-05-25
2024-12-31
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.
Uncemented Tritanium Compared With Cemented Metal-backed Tibia Components in Total Knee Replacement
NCT02578446
Simplex High Viscosity Bone Cement in Primary Total Knee Arthroplasty
NCT02572310
Porous Baseplate in Total Knee Replacement
NCT05226689
Post-marketing Surveillance Study of the Triathlon Tritanium Baseplate
NCT02905097
Evaluation of Two Surgical Strategies for Robotic Implantation of Total Knee Prostheses (Stryker), Cemented Versus Uncemented
NCT04692714
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.
COHORT
CROSS_SECTIONAL
Study Groups
Review each arm or cohort in the study, along with the interventions and objectives associated with them.
Prior Cementless Knee Replacement Cohort
Patients who received a cementless knee replacement in 2017-2018 and participated in a prior study measuring the first year of implant migration.
Cementless Total Knee Replacement
Artificial knee implant inserted by cementless fixation.
Interventions
Learn about the drugs, procedures, or behavioral strategies being tested and how they are applied within this trial.
Cementless Total Knee Replacement
Artificial knee implant inserted by cementless fixation.
Eligibility Criteria
Check the participation requirements, including inclusion and exclusion rules, age limits, and whether healthy volunteers are accepted.
Inclusion Criteria
* Had successful imaging at 1-year post-operation
* Minimum of 5 years post-operation
Exclusion Criteria
* Unable to follow-up
21 Years
90 Years
ALL
No
Sponsors
Meet the organizations funding or collaborating on the study and learn about their roles.
Schulich School of Medicine and Dentistry
UNKNOWN
London Health Sciences Centre Research Institute OR Lawson Research Institute of St. Joseph's
OTHER
Responsible Party
Identify the individual or organization who holds primary responsibility for the study information submitted to regulators.
Brent Lanting
Orthopaedic Surgeon, Principal Investigator
Principal Investigators
Learn about the lead researchers overseeing the trial and their institutional affiliations.
Brent Lanting, MD MSc FRCSC
Role: PRINCIPAL_INVESTIGATOR
Schulich School of Medicine and Dentistry
Locations
Explore where the study is taking place and check the recruitment status at each participating site.
University Hospital
London, Ontario, Canada
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.
Siddiqi A, Levine BR, Springer BD. Highlights of the 2021 American Joint Replacement Registry Annual Report. Arthroplast Today. 2022 Jan 29;13:205-207. doi: 10.1016/j.artd.2022.01.020. eCollection 2022 Feb. No abstract available.
Cherian JJ, Banerjee S, Kapadia BH, Jauregui JJ, Harwin SF, Mont MA. Cementless total knee arthroplasty: a review. J Knee Surg. 2014 Jun;27(3):193-7. doi: 10.1055/s-0034-1374811. Epub 2014 Apr 24.
Nam D, Lawrie CM, Salih R, Nahhas CR, Barrack RL, Nunley RM. Cemented Versus Cementless Total Knee Arthroplasty of the Same Modern Design: A Prospective, Randomized Trial. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2019 Jul 3;101(13):1185-1192. doi: 10.2106/JBJS.18.01162.
Nam D, Bhowmik-Stoker M, Mahoney OM, Dunbar MJ, Barrack RL. Mid-Term Performance of the First Mass-Produced Three-Dimensional Printed Cementless Tibia in the United States as Reported in the American Joint Replacement Registry. J Arthroplasty. 2023 Jan;38(1):85-89. doi: 10.1016/j.arth.2022.07.020. Epub 2022 Aug 5.
Valstar ER, Nelissen RG, Reiber JH, Rozing PM. The use of Roentgen stereophotogrammetry to study micromotion of orthopaedic implants. ISPRS journal of photogrammetry and remote sensing 2002;56(5):376-89.
Canadian Joint Replacement Registry. Hip and Knee Replacements in Canada: CJRR Annual Statistics Summary, 2018-2019.; 2019.
Pijls BG, Plevier JWM, Nelissen RGHH. RSA migration of total knee replacements. Acta Orthop. 2018 Jun;89(3):320-328. doi: 10.1080/17453674.2018.1443635. Epub 2018 Mar 6.
Williams HA, Broberg JS, Howard JL, Lanting BA, Teeter MG. Effect of gap balancing and measured resection techniques on implant migration and contact kinematics of a cementless total knee arthroplasty. Knee. 2021 Aug;31:86-96. doi: 10.1016/j.knee.2021.05.011. Epub 2021 Jun 10.
Broden C, Sandberg O, Olivecrona H, Emery R, Skoldenberg O. Precision of CT-based micromotion analysis is comparable to radiostereometry for early migration measurements in cemented acetabular cups. Acta Orthop. 2021 Aug;92(4):419-423. doi: 10.1080/17453674.2021.1906082. Epub 2021 Apr 6.
Das M, Cronin O, Keohane DM, Cormac EM, Nugent H, Nugent M, Molloy C, O'Toole PW, Shanahan F, Molloy MG, Jeffery IB. Gut microbiota alterations associated with reduced bone mineral density in older adults. Rheumatology (Oxford). 2019 Dec 1;58(12):2295-2304. doi: 10.1093/rheumatology/kez302.
Ma R, Wu M, Li Y, Wang J, Yang P, Chen Y, Wang W, Song J, Wang K. The use of bone turnover markers for monitoring the treatment of osteoporosis in postmenopausal females undergoing total knee arthroplasty: a prospective randomized study. J Orthop Surg Res. 2021 Mar 17;16(1):195. doi: 10.1186/s13018-021-02343-3.
Al KF, Bisanz JE, Gloor GB, Reid G, Burton JP. Evaluation of sampling and storage procedures on preserving the community structure of stool microbiota: A simple at-home toilet-paper collection method. J Microbiol Methods. 2018 Jan;144:117-121. doi: 10.1016/j.mimet.2017.11.014. Epub 2017 Nov 16.
Other Identifiers
Review additional registry numbers or institutional identifiers associated with this trial.
12925
Identifier Type: -
Identifier Source: org_study_id
More Related Trials
Additional clinical trials that may be relevant based on similarity analysis.