AzTrials
AzTrials

OsteoarthritisNCT00657956

Roentgen Stereophotogrammetric Analysis (RSA) to Evaluate Fixation of Biofoam Advance Total Knee Arthroplasty Components

A study testing Advance Biofoam porous metal backed tibial component with or without screw augmentation in people with Osteoarthritis, run by Dalhousie University at 1 site in Canada.

Completed

Finished. The study has ended and is not enrolling. Results may be posted on the official record.

Official record
Search all trials

Trial summary

Hip and knee replacement arthroplasty are profoundly successful operative interventions, however, some joint replacements do fail and the life expectancy of a hip or knee arthroplasty is finite. Read more about this study

Who is it for?
Ages 21 to 80 years
Conditions the study is for
Osteoarthritis
What is being tested?
Advance Biofoam porous metal backed tibial component with or without screw augmentation
Type of treatment
Medical device
How many people
50 participants
Where
1 siteCanada
Study dates
Apr 2008to Jan 2013
Phase
Interventional
Are there results?
None posted in the registry

Key requirements

Who can take part, as listed by the sponsor. Only the study team can confirm whether you are eligible, so take this list to your doctor.

  • Ages 21 to 80 years
  • All sexes
  • No healthy volunteers
  • Adult, Older adult

Who may be able to join

  • Symptomatic osteoarthritis of the knee indicating surgical intervention
  • Between the ages of 21 and 80 inclusive
  • Ability to give informed consent

Who cannot join

  • Significant co-morbidity affecting ability to ambulate
  • Flexion contracture greater than 15°
  • Extension lag greater than 10°
  • Tibial subluxation greater than 10 mm on standing AP radiograph
  • Prior arthroplasty, patellectomy or osteotomy with the affected knee
  • Lateral or medial collateral ligament instability (> 10° varus/valgus)
Show all 12Show fewer
  • Leg length discrepancy greater than 10 mm
  • Active or prior infection
  • Morbid Obesity (BMI > 40)
  • Medical condition precluding major surgery
  • Severe osteoporosis or osteopenia
  • Neuromuscular impairment

Trial locations and contacts

1 site in 1 country.

Canada1 site
  • Halifax Infirmary

    Halifax, Nova Scotia, B3H 3A7

Other trials in Canada

About this study

Official title: Prospective RCT Using Roentgen Stereophotogrammetric Analysis (RSA) to Evaluate Fixation of the Biofoam Advance Total Knee Arthroplasty Components With and Without Screw Augmentation

Hip and knee replacement arthroplasty are profoundly successful operative interventions, however, some joint replacements do fail and the life expectancy of a hip or knee arthroplasty is finite. This fact has largely been responsible for the continued development of new devices and techniques for joint arthroplasty surgery. Unfortunately, the introduction of new technologies and devices is not a benign process, and even subtle changes to existing implants can have a disastrous effect on patient outcome. The fact that new technologies and devices can lead to poor results has led some authors to advocate a phased introduction of new technologies. A key component of the phased introduction approach advocates the use of roentgen stereophotogrammetric analysis (RSA) early in the testing process. RSA is a highly accurate radiographic technique developed in Lund, Sweden and has for some time been the gold standard in Europe for assessing the stability of implants within bone. The purpose of this study is to utilize RSA to elucidate the migration patterns of the foam metal backed Advance Knee Arthroplasty components during the first 2 years postoperatively and to determine in what proportion of cases adequate fixation is achieved. In addition outcome measures will be recorded to quantify changes in functional status of subjects after surgery and bone mineral density will be monitored to quantify bone in-growth around the implant. Migration patterns will be compared to results obtained from previous studies of uncemented and cemented total knee arthroplasty components conducted at this centre.

Read the detailed description

Hip and knee replacement arthroplasty are profoundly successful operative interventions, however, some joint replacements do fail and the life expectancy of a hip or knee arthroplasty is finite. This fact has largely been responsible for the continued development of new devices and techniques for joint arthroplasty surgery. Unfortunately, the introduction of new technologies and devices is not a benign process, and even subtle changes to existing implants can have a disastrous effect on patient outcome.

The fact that new technologies and devices can lead to poor results has led some authors to advocate a phased introduction of new technologies. A key component of the phased introduction approach advocates the use of roentgen stereophotogrammetric analysis (RSA) early in the testing process.

RSA is a highly accurate radiographic technique developed in Lund, Sweden and has for some time been the gold standard in Europe for assessing the stability of implants within bone. It is at least ten times more accurate than conventional radiography. RSA involves the insertion of small tantalum markers (0.8mm) into the bone and prosthesis at the time of surgery. By using a calibrated cage with additional markers and simultaneous bi-planar x-rays, micromotion at the prosthesis-bone interface can be very precisely determined. Two types of micromotion can be investigated: migration, i.e. gradual motion over time, and inducible displacement, i.e. instant motion in response to external forces. The pattern of micromotion exhibited by various prostheses and fixation techniques within the first post-operative year has been shown to be predictive of the long-term fixation of the component to bone, especially when considering the tibial prosthesis-bone interface. The value of this precise radiographic technique is that new technologies and techniques can be introduced in vivo while limiting their exposure to as few patients as possible. RSA is a proven, safe and invaluable method for assessing methods of knee component fixation as well as different design concepts.

DEXA bone densitometry has been demonstrated as a reliable method for determination bone mineral density about knee and hip implants. This technique provides further detail about the quality of fixation of knee and hip prostheses and implant induced bone remodeling.

The foam metal backed Advance Knee Arthroplasty components utilize a porous titanium coating on the non-articulating surface of the components to enhance the implant-bone interface. This 3-dimensional scaffold should promote bone in-growth that may provide a more robust bone-implant interface. The high coefficient of friction provides initial fixation negating the need for bone cement which should reduce duration of surgery. There is also a version of the Biofoam Advance that incorporates screwed fixation that allows for augmented fixation with up to four titanium screws, however, it is not clear that this augmentation is necessary.

The implant is based on previous proven designs from Wright Medical such as the Whiteside and Advance Medial Pivot. It incorporates the polyethylene, tibial tray and stem design from the Advance Medial Pivot and four stabilizing pegs on the underside of the tibial component that were used in the Whiteside. Of particular interest is the modularity of the Biofoam design, both the polyethylene and the tibial stem are attached to the tibial tray intraoperatively with the stem held in place with a morse taper, potentially providing the surgeon more sizing and positioning options during surgery.

Study Objective The purpose of this study is to utilize RSA to elucidate the migration patterns of the foam metal backed Advance Knee Arthroplasty components during the first 2 years postoperatively and to determine in what proportion of cases adequate fixation is achieved. In addition outcome measures will be recorded to quantify changes in functional status of subjects after surgery and bone mineral density will be monitored to quantify bone in-growth around the implant. Migration patterns will be compared to results obtained from previous studies of uncemented and cemented total knee arthroplasty components conducted at this centre.

Study Design This is a consecutive sample randomized control trial of patients undergoing total knee arthroplasty with the foam metal backed Advance Biofoam Knee Arthroplasty system (Wright Medical Inc.) with and without screws utilizing RSA to identify the migration patterns of the tibial and femoral components of the implant. DEXA scanning will also be conducted to determine changes in the bone mineral density adjacent to the implant. Health status and functional outcome measures will be recorded to quantify functional status of subjects before surgery and at each follow-up interval.

Statement of research questions Question 1: Is there a difference in fixation to the proximal tibia between tibial components fixed with screws and those without screws?

Null Hypothesis:

There is no significant difference in micromotion patterns of the foam metal backed arthroplasty components fixed with screws and those fixed without.

Alternative Hypothesis:

There are significant differences in micromotion patterns between the tibial components fixed with screws and those fixed without.

Question 2: Do the screwed components achieve adequate fixation to the underlying bone?

Null Hypothesis:

There is no significant continuous migration at 2 years with the screwed components indicating adequate long-term fixation at the implant - bone interface.

Alternative Hypothesis:

There is significant continuous migration at 2 years with the screwed components indicating inadequate fixation at the implant - bone interface.

Question 3: Do the unscrewed components achieve adequate fixation to the underlying bone?

Null Hypothesis:

There is no significant continuous migration at 2 years with the unscrewed components indicating adequate long-term fixation at the implant - bone interface.

Alternative Hypothesis: There is significant continuous migration at 2 years with the unscrewed components indicating inadequate fixation at the implant - bone interface.

Question 4: What are the migration patterns (translations and rotations) of the foam metal backed arthroplasty components during the first two years postoperatively and how do they compare between those fixed with screws and those fixed without screws?

Question 5: For what proportion of implants in each group does migration continue to increase during the two year follow-up?

Question 6: Is there a significant difference in health status and functional outcome before and after total knee arthroplasty using foam metal backed arthroplasty components?

Question 7: Are there significant difference in bone mineral density between the operative knee (distal femur and proximal tibia) and other body sites over time?

Subjects n= 21 per group

Allowing for 20% lost to follow-up a total sample size of 50 (25 per group) will be sufficient to elucidate a significant difference in micromotion (clinically significant motion defined as ≥ 0.2 mm) between groups.

Subjects will be screened consecutively and enrolled from clinic after informed consent has been obtained. Their vital information and co-morbidities will be recorded from the chart and functional status will be assessed using the KSCRS, SF-36, WOMAC, Oxford 12 knee score, UCLA Activity Level, Self-Administered Comorbidity Questionnaire (SCQ), the Pain and Catastrophizing Scale (PCS) and visual analogue scales for pain and health status. All information will be kept strictly confidential.

Conditions
Osteoarthritis
Being tested
Advance Biofoam porous metal backed tibial component with or without screw augmentation
Keywords
osteoarthritis, arthroplasty, knee joint, radiography, surgery, Bone Density, Outcome Assessment (Health Care)
Medical subject headings
Osteoarthritis

What participants receive

What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.

  • Advance Biofoam porous metal backed tibial component with or without screw augmentationDevice

    total knee arthroplasty tibial component that has a backing of porous titanium metal to facilitate bone in-growth

What is being measured

The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.

  1. micromotion of tibial component as measured with RSA

    Measured: 2 years postoperative

Secondary outcomes (2)
  1. Bone mineral density around the tibial component

    Measured: 2 years postoperative

  2. Subjective health outcome questionnaires - SF36, WOMAC, Oxford12 knee, Pain and Catastrophizing Scale, Standardized comorbidity questionnaire

    Measured: 2 years postoperative

Timeline

From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.

  1. First posted14 Apr 2008 (estimated)
  2. Study startApr 2008
  3. Primary completionJan 2013
  4. Study completionJan 2013

Resources

More details

For doctors and researchers: how the study is designed, who runs it, and its registry IDs.

Study design
Study type
Interventional
Phase
Phase N/A
Primary purpose
Treatment
Allocation
Randomised
Intervention model
Parallel groups
Masking
Single blind
Who is masked
Participant
Enrolment
50 participants (actual)
IDs, dates and publications
ClinicalTrials.gov ID
NCT00657956
Sponsor's protocol ID
Dal07-02
Other IDs
CDHA-RS/2007-250
Status last verified
Mar 2014
First submitted
8 Apr 2008
Last updated
31 Mar 2014
Results posted
No
Data monitoring committee
No

Questions about this trial

What is this clinical trial studying?

A study testing Advance Biofoam porous metal backed tibial component with or without screw augmentation in people with Osteoarthritis, run by Dalhousie University at 1 site in Canada.

The full registered description is in the About this study section and the official record.

Who may be eligible to take part?

The sponsor lists 3 inclusion and 12 exclusion criteria. Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening, so read the full criteria and contact a listed site.

Is this clinical trial currently recruiting?

The record says: finished, as of the sponsor's last update on 31 Mar 2014. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.

Where is the study taking place?

The record lists 1 site in Canada. Whether a site is taking part right now should be confirmed with that site. See every site.

What are the possible benefits and risks?

They depend on the study and the treatment, and no study can promise a benefit. The study team explains the known risks during informed consent, before anyone joins; the record itself does not list them.

Are results available for this study?

The study is completed, but results are not available in the source record. That does not mean the treatment did or did not work.

How can a doctor refer a patient or contact the research team?

The record lists no contact. The official record names the sponsor, who can be asked directly. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.

What does the primary outcome measure?

micromotion of tibial component as measured with RSA (time frame: 2 years postoperative). It is what the study was designed to measure, not a finding.

Where can I read the original study information?
Does a listing mean the treatment is approved or proven to work?

No. A listing means the study is registered. It does not show that the treatment is safe, works, or is approved by a regulator.

How often is this information updated?

AzTrials copies changed records from ClinicalTrials.gov every night and reloads the whole registry every week. The sponsor last updated this record on 31 Mar 2014.

Free account

Log in to keep searching

You’ve used your 3 free searches. AzTrials is free: log in or create a free account to keep searching clinical trials and save the ones you want to follow.

Create a free accountLog in