Osteo Arthritis KneeTRAKERNCT05290818
Total Versus Robotic Assisted Unicompartmental Knee Replacement
A study testing MAKO™ Partial Knee Arthroplasty and Triathlon (Stryker) Total Knee Arthroplasty in people with Osteo Arthritis Knee and Arthritis Knee, run by NHS Lothian at 1 site in United Kingdom.
Trial summary
The purpose of this research is to compare the functional outcomes of patients with end stage medial compartment OA of the knee undergoing a conventional mTKA to those undergoing rUKA and to assess the associated cost economics of such technology. Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages 50 to 75 years
- Conditions the study is for
- Osteo Arthritis Knee, Arthritis Knee, Arthropathy of Knee
- What is being tested?
- MAKO™ Partial Knee Arthroplasty and Triathlon (Stryker) Total Knee Arthroplasty
- Type of treatment
- Medical device
- Could I receive a placebo?
- No, everyone receives an active treatment
- How many people
- 159 participants
- Where
- 1 siteUnited Kingdom
- Study dates
- 26 Aug 2024to 31 Dec 2027
- Phase
- Interventional
- Are there results?
- Not yet: the study is under way
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 50 to 75 years
- All sexes
- No healthy volunteers
- Adult, Older adult
Who may be able to join
- Listed for elective primary TKA for end stage medial compartment osteoarthritis
- Intact anterior cruciate ligament
- Full thickness and good quality lateral cartilage
- Correctable intra-articular varus deformity and intact medial collateral ligament
- American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) grades 1 and 2
- Male or female, age 50 - 75 at the time of listing for surgery
- Suitable candidate for a cruciate retaining TKA (Triathlon prosthesis) and a UKA
Who cannot join
- Varus deformity of > 20 degrees
- Fixed flexion of >10 degrees
- Patient is unable to comply with the study protocol (incl. refusal for CT scan) or functional assessments
- Female participants who are pregnant, lactating or planning pregnancy during the course of the study
- Requires patella resurfacing or lateral compartment has significant OA
- Inability to understand the patient information for the study, provide written informed consent or answer study questionnaires for cognitive or language reasons
Show all 10Show fewer
- Inflammatory disorder e.g. rheumatoid arthritis
- Symptomatic foot, hip or spine pathology
- Prior surgery (other than arthroscopy) or septic arthritis of the knee
- Any other significant disease or disorder which, in the opinion of the Investigator, may either put the participants at risk because of participation in the study,
Trial locations and contacts
1 site in 1 country. Contact the study team or a site near you to ask about taking part.
United Kingdom1 site, 1 recruiting
- Recruiting
Nicholas Clement
Edinburgh, Lothian, EH16 6SA
Nicholas D Clement, MD, PhD, (+44)131 536 1000, nick.clement@nhslothian.scot.nhs.uk
James T Patton, FRCS, (+44)131 536 1000, Sam.Patton@nhslothian.scot.nhs.uk
About this study
Official title: Total Versus Robotic Assisted Unicompartmental Knee Replacement (TRAKER) for Medial Compartment Osteoarthritis: Randomised Controlled Trial
The purpose of this research is to compare the functional outcomes of patients with end stage medial compartment OA of the knee undergoing a conventional mTKA to those undergoing rUKA and to assess the associated cost economics of such technology.
Read the detailed description
Unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA) is an accepted surgical alternative to total knee arthroplasty (TKA) for patients with isolated medial compartmental joint disease with the potential advantages of accelerated recovery, improved functional outcomes and retention of anatomical knee kinematics. However, some surgeons continue to favour TKA over UKA due to a lower revision rate. The higher revision rates associated with UKA are thought to be primarily due to component malpositioning and postoperative limb malalignment.
Robotic-arm assisted (r)UKA offers a greater level of precision of component positioning compared to manual UKA and more recently the survivorship of rUKA has been shown to be greater than manual UKA. Early functional outcomes following robotic UKA appear to be better than those observed after manual TKA. Therefore, the benefits of UKA could potentially be enjoyed by the patient without the increased risk of revision when compared to TKA for those with medical compartment disease.
The primary aim of this study is to compare the early knee specific functional outcome of rUKA with manually performed (m)TKA when performed for patients with medial compartment osteoarthritis of the knee.
A single centre randomised control trial will be carried out powered to the Oxford knee score.
- Conditions
- Osteo Arthritis Knee, Arthritis Knee, Arthropathy of Knee
- Being tested
- MAKO™ Partial Knee Arthroplasty, Triathlon (Stryker) Total Knee Arthroplasty
- Keywords
- Arthroplasty, Robotic, Knee, Total, Partial, Outcome, MAKO
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
MAKO™ Partial Knee ArthroplastyDevice
Also called Robotic-arm assisted partial knee arthroplasty
The robotic-arm will be used to position a partial knee arthroplasty.
Triathlon (Stryker) Total Knee ArthroplastyDevice
Also called Total Knee Replacement
Triathlon (Stryker) TKA with a cruciate retaining polyethylene insert.
| Study group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| Manual Total Knee Arthroplasty | Active comparator | This group will receive a conventional manual Triathlon (Stryker) TKA with a cruciate retaining polyethylene insert. The surgeon will then make bone cuts using a manual jig and a hand held saw to prepare the bone surfaces for the implant. A measured resection technique will be employed with a three degree tibial slope. The surgeon will use a conventional jig alignment technique for intramedullary referencing for the femur and extra medullary referencing for the tibia. Once the implant is in position the knee is then balanced by the "feel" though a range of movement and soft tissue releases will be performed as required to balance the knee in flexion and extension. Receives: Device: Triathlon (Stryker) Total Knee Arthroplasty |
| Robotic Assisted Unicompartmental Knee Arthroplasty | Experimental | This group will receive the cemented Restoris MCK (Mako, Stryker) with a highly crossed linked (X3) polyethylene insert through a less invasive to the knee joint. Instead of using a manual jig and a hand held burr will be used to prepare the bone surfaces for the implant, the MAKO robotic arm will be used by the surgeon to cut the bone at the required alignment. The information from the CT scan will be used to create a 3D model of the patient's bony anatomy and will used to plan the positioning of the implant. Once the trackers are in place registration of the knee joint surface is performed. The specified bone cuts are then performed using the robotic arm, aiming to gap balance the knee through a full range of movement. Receives: Device: MAKO™ Partial Knee Arthroplasty |
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
Oxford knee score
Knee specific functional outcome measure. It consists of twelve questions assessed on a Likert scale with values from 0 to 4, to give a summative score. This is measured on a scale from 0 (worst) to 48 (best).
Measured: Baseline to 6 months
Secondary outcomes (8)
Oxford knee score and Activity and Participation Questionnaire
The Oxford knee score is a knee specific functional outcome measure. It consists of twelve questions assessed on a Likert scale with values from 0 to 4, to give a summative score. This is measured on a scale from 0 (worst) to 48 (best). The additional Activity and Participation Questionnaire is a higher functioning supplementary questionnaire consisting of a further eight questions scored 0 (worst) to 4 (best).
Measured: Baseline to 3, 6 and 12 months
Forgotten Joint Score
Knee specific functional outcome. It uses a five-point Likert response format, consisting of 12 equally weighted questions with the raw score transformed to range from zero (worst) to 100 (best) points.
Measured: Baseline to 3, 6 and 12 months
Patient satisfaction
Patient satisfaction will be assessed following surgery by asking four questions with a different focus:
- "Overall how satisfied are you with the results of your knee replacement surgery?" ii. "How satisfied are you with the results of your knee replacement surgery for improving your ability to do housework or yard work (such as cooking, cleaning, or gardening and raking leaves)?" iii. "How satisfied are you with the results of your knee replacement surgery for improving your ability to do recreational activities (such as taking walks, swimming, bicycling, playing golf, dancing, going out with friends)?" iv. "How satisfied are you with the results of your knee replacement surgery for relieving your pain?" The response to each question will be recorded using a four point Likert scale: very satisfied, somewhat satisfied, somewhat dissatisfied, and very dissatisfied.
Measured: 3, 6 and 12 months
EQ-5D-3L
Quality of life will be assessed using the EQ-5D-3L general health questionnaire which evaluates five domains (-5D), which include: mobility, self-care, usual activities, pain/discomfort, and anxiety/depression. This is a two page questionnaire that consists of five dimensions, with the responses recorded at three levels (3L) of severity (no problems; some problems or extreme problems). The utility index is on a scale of -0.594 to 1, where 1 represents perfect health and a negative value represents a state perceived as worse than death.
The second page consists of a standard vertical 20cm visual analogue scale (EQ-5D VAS) which is transformed to a scale of 0 (worst) to 100 (best) measuring current health-related quality of life. Each patient's health state, derived from the EQ-5D, will be measured before and after their surgery to determine the change in their health gain or loss after their knee replacement surgery.
Measured: Baseline to 3, 6 and 12 months
Range of movement
A goniometer will be used to measure range of movement by a blinded researcher prior to surgery (baseline), at discharge (immediately post surgery prior to discharge home) and at review appoints. Three measurements will be recorded for extension and flexion of the knee and an average will be documented.
Measured: Baseline to 3, 6 and 12 months
Cost effectiveness
Cost utility analysis will be undertaken to establish the incremental cost effectiveness ratio (ICER). Each patient's health state, derived from the EQ-5D, will be measured before and after their surgery to determine the change in their health gain or loss after their knee replacement surgery. The health state will then be multiplied by the time spent in that state to derive the QALYs gained or lost. The cost per QALY will then be calculated by dividing the cost of the procedure by the QALYs gained after total knee arthroplasty (intervention). A health service resource use questionnaire will be completed by the patient at the 3, 6 and 12 month research assessment. The questionnaire collects data on primary, secondary and community care and associated with the knee replacement over the previous months. Inpatient and surgical data will be collected on the case report forms (CRF's) and complications will be recorded at each visit.
Measured: Baseline to 3, 6 and 12 months, and projected for the patients lifetime
Knee stability and power
Knee stability (stress testing) and power (power rig) will be measured. A stress will be applied to the knee and the joint space opening will be measured using an ultrasound probe which will be used as a marker of knee stability. The power of the knee joint will be assessed using a standardise power rig Specific assessment of the patient's power output will be evaluated by a Leg Extensor Power Rig (Nottingham, UK), well validated for use with this population group.
Measured: Baseline to 3, 6 and 12 months
Patient expectation pre-operative and fulfilment
The Hospital of Special Surgery Expectation questionnaire is a validated measure of patient pre-operative expectations of surgery. The level of patient expectation is indicated on a 5 point Likert scale as 'very important', 'somewhat important', 'a little important', 'I do not expect this' or 'this does not apply to me'. After surgery patients will complete a similar expectation questionnaire, but are asked whether the same expectations had been fulfilled, which again is assessed on a 5 point Likert scale as: 'greatly', 'a lot', 'a little', 'I did not expect this' or 'this did not apply to me'.
Measured: Baseline to 3, 6 and 12 months
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted22 Mar 2022
- Study start26 Aug 2024
- Primary completion31 Dec 2026 (estimated)
- Study completion31 Dec 2027 (estimated)
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Publications (4)Papers the sponsor has linked to this study.
- Other trials for Osteo Arthritis KneeStudies of the same condition, open and under way.
- What the trial phases meanHow a treatment moves from first tests in people to approval.
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
- Model description
- Randomised control Trial (1:2 ratio: 53 in the rUKA arm and 106 in the mTKA)
- Masking
- Double blind
- Who is masked
- Investigator, Outcomes assessor
- Enrolment
- 159 participants (estimated)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- NHS Lothian
- Sponsor type
- Other government
- Responsible party
- Sponsor
- Investigators
- Nicholas D Clement, MD, PhD, Principal investigator, NHS Lothian
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT05290818
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- AC19080
- Acronym
- TRAKER
- Status last verified
- Sep 2026
- First submitted
- 16 Feb 2022
- Last updated
- 23 Sep 2026
- Results posted
- No
- Data monitoring committee
- No
- FDA-regulated drug
- No
- FDA-regulated device
- Yes
- Individual data sharing
- No: There is no plan to make individual patient data available.
Publications
Robinson PG, Clement ND, Hamilton D, Blyth MJG, Haddad FS, Patton JT. A systematic review of robotic-assisted unicompartmental knee arthroplasty: prosthesis design and type should be reported. Bone Joint J. 2019 Jul;101-B(7):838-847. doi: 10.1302/0301-620X.101B7.BJJ-2018-1317.R1.
PubMed 31256672Clement ND, Bell A, Simpson P, Macpherson G, Patton JT, Hamilton DF. Robotic-assisted unicompartmental knee arthroplasty has a greater early functional outcome when compared to manual total knee arthroplasty for isolated medial compartment arthritis. Bone Joint Res. 2020 May 16;9(1):15-22. doi: 10.1302/2046-3758.91.BJR-2019-0147.R1. eCollection 2020 Jan.
PubMed 32435451Clement ND, Deehan DJ, Patton JT. Robot-assisted unicompartmental knee arthroplasty for patients with isolated medial compartment osteoarthritis is cost-effective: a markov decision analysis. Bone Joint J. 2019 Sep;101-B(9):1063-1070. doi: 10.1302/0301-620X.101B9.BJJ-2018-1658.R1.
PubMed 31474149Clement ND; TRAKER Research Group; Scott CEH, Macpherson GJ, Simpson PM, Leitch G, Patton JT, Ahmed I, Amin AK, Gaston P, Goudie E, Goudie S, Macdonald DM, Martinson E, Moran M, Wade F. Total versus robotic-assisted unicompartmental knee replacement (TRAKER) for medial compartment osteorthritis: a randomized controlled trial. Bone Jt Open. 2025 Feb 10;6(2):164-177. doi: 10.1302/2633-1462.62.BJO-2024-0155.R1.
PubMed 39923804
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 23 Sep 2026. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- Total Versus Robotic Assisted Unicompartmental Knee Replacement (TRAKER) for Medial Compartment Osteoarthritis: Randomised Controlled Trial
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT05290818
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- TRAKER / AC19080
- Conditions
- Osteo Arthritis Knee, Arthritis Knee, Arthropathy of Knee
- Keywords
- Arthroplasty, Robotic, Knee, Total, Partial, Outcome, MAKO
- Study type
- Interventional
- Recruitment status
- Recruiting
- Enrolment
- 159 participants (estimated)
- Lead sponsor
- NHS LothianOther government
- Study start
- 26 Aug 2024 (actual)
- Primary completion
- 31 Dec 2026 (estimated)
- Study completion
- 31 Dec 2027 (estimated)
- First posted
- 22 Mar 2022 (actual)
- Results
- Not posted in the source record
Clinical summary
The research question as the sponsor registered it. This describes what the study plans to test, not what it found.
The purpose of this research is to compare the functional outcomes of patients with end stage medial compartment OA of the knee undergoing a conventional mTKA to those undergoing rUKA and to assess the associated cost economics of such technology.
Detailed description
Unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA) is an accepted surgical alternative to total knee arthroplasty (TKA) for patients with isolated medial compartmental joint disease with the potential advantages of accelerated recovery, improved functional outcomes and retention of anatomical knee kinematics. However, some surgeons continue to favour TKA over UKA due to a lower revision rate. The higher revision rates associated with UKA are thought to be primarily due to component malpositioning and postoperative limb malalignment.
Robotic-arm assisted (r)UKA offers a greater level of precision of component positioning compared to manual UKA and more recently the survivorship of rUKA has been shown to be greater than manual UKA. Early functional outcomes following robotic UKA appear to be better than those observed after manual TKA. Therefore, the benefits of UKA could potentially be enjoyed by the patient without the increased risk of revision when compared to TKA for those with medical compartment disease.
The primary aim of this study is to compare the early knee specific functional outcome of rUKA with manually performed (m)TKA when performed for patients with medial compartment osteoarthritis of the knee.
A single centre randomised control trial will be carried out powered to the Oxford knee score.
Study design
- Primary purpose
- Treatment
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- Double blind (investigator, outcomes assessor)
- Number of arms
- 2
- Model description
- Randomised control Trial (1:2 ratio: 53 in the rUKA arm and 106 in the mTKA)
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| Manual Total Knee Arthroplasty | Active comparator | Device: Triathlon (Stryker) Total Knee ArthroplastyThis group will receive a conventional manual Triathlon (Stryker) TKA with a cruciate retaining polyethylene insert. The surgeon will then make bone cuts using a manual jig and a hand held saw to prepare the bone surfaces for the implant. A measured resection technique will be employed with a three degree tibial slope. The surgeon will use a conventional jig alignment technique for intramedullary referencing for the femur and extra medullary referencing for the tibia. Once the implant is in position the knee is then balanced by the "feel" though a range of movement and soft tissue releases will be performed as required to balance the knee in flexion and extension. |
| Robotic Assisted Unicompartmental Knee Arthroplasty | Experimental | Device: MAKO™ Partial Knee ArthroplastyThis group will receive the cemented Restoris MCK (Mako, Stryker) with a highly crossed linked (X3) polyethylene insert through a less invasive to the knee joint. Instead of using a manual jig and a hand held burr will be used to prepare the bone surfaces for the implant, the MAKO robotic arm will be used by the surgeon to cut the bone at the required alignment. The information from the CT scan will be used to create a 3D model of the patient's bony anatomy and will used to plan the positioning of the implant. Once the trackers are in place registration of the knee joint surface is performed. The specified bone cuts are then performed using the robotic arm, aiming to gap balance the knee through a full range of movement. |
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 50 to 75 years
- Sex
- All
- Healthy volunteers
- Not accepted
- Age groups
- Adult, Older adult
Key inclusion criteria (7 listed)
- Listed for elective primary TKA for end stage medial compartment osteoarthritis
- Intact anterior cruciate ligament
- Full thickness and good quality lateral cartilage
- Correctable intra-articular varus deformity and intact medial collateral ligament
- American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) grades 1 and 2
Key exclusion criteria (10 listed)
- Varus deformity of > 20 degrees
- Fixed flexion of >10 degrees
- Patient is unable to comply with the study protocol (incl. refusal for CT scan) or functional assessments
- Female participants who are pregnant, lactating or planning pregnancy during the course of the study
- Requires patella resurfacing or lateral compartment has significant OA
Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening; this overview does not establish that a patient qualifies. Full inclusion and exclusion criteria.
Interventions
| Intervention | Type | Arms |
|---|---|---|
| MAKO™ Partial Knee ArthroplastyAlso: Robotic-arm assisted partial knee arthroplastyThe robotic-arm will be used to position a partial knee arthroplasty. | Device | Robotic Assisted Unicompartmental Knee Arthroplasty |
| Triathlon (Stryker) Total Knee ArthroplastyAlso: Total Knee ReplacementTriathlon (Stryker) TKA with a cruciate retaining polyethylene insert. | Device | Manual Total Knee Arthroplasty |
Primary outcome
Oxford knee score
Time frame: Baseline to 6 months
Knee specific functional outcome measure. It consists of twelve questions assessed on a Likert scale with values from 0 to 4, to give a summative score. This is measured on a scale from 0 (worst) to 48 (best).
8 secondary outcomes
Oxford knee score and Activity and Participation Questionnaire
Time frame: Baseline to 3, 6 and 12 months
Forgotten Joint Score
Time frame: Baseline to 3, 6 and 12 months
Patient satisfaction
Time frame: 3, 6 and 12 months
EQ-5D-3L
Time frame: Baseline to 3, 6 and 12 months
Range of movement
Time frame: Baseline to 3, 6 and 12 months
Cost effectiveness
Time frame: Baseline to 3, 6 and 12 months, and projected for the patients lifetime
Knee stability and power
Time frame: Baseline to 3, 6 and 12 months
Patient expectation pre-operative and fulfilment
Time frame: Baseline to 3, 6 and 12 months
Results and safety
This study is still under way. Results are not available in the source record yet.
Research links
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govLast updated by the sponsor 23 Sep 2026.
- Background: PubMed 31256672Robinson PG, Clement ND, Hamilton D, Blyth MJG, Haddad FS, Patton JT. A systematic review of robotic-assisted unicompartmental knee arthroplasty: prosthesis design and type should be reported. Bone Joint J. 2019 Jul;101-B(7):838-847. doi: 10.1302/0301-620X.101B7.BJJ-2018-1317.R1.
- Background: PubMed 32435451Clement ND, Bell A, Simpson P, Macpherson G, Patton JT, Hamilton DF. Robotic-assisted unicompartmental knee arthroplasty has a greater early functional outcome when compared to manual total knee arthroplasty for isolated medial compartment arthritis. Bone Joint Res. 2020 May 16;9(1):15-22. doi: 10.1302/2046-3758.91.BJR-2019-0147.R1. eCollection 2020 Jan.
- Background: PubMed 31474149Clement ND, Deehan DJ, Patton JT. Robot-assisted unicompartmental knee arthroplasty for patients with isolated medial compartment osteoarthritis is cost-effective: a markov decision analysis. Bone Joint J. 2019 Sep;101-B(9):1063-1070. doi: 10.1302/0301-620X.101B9.BJJ-2018-1658.R1.
- Derived from this study: PubMed 39923804Clement ND; TRAKER Research Group; Scott CEH, Macpherson GJ, Simpson PM, Leitch G, Patton JT, Ahmed I, Amin AK, Gaston P, Goudie E, Goudie S, Macdonald DM, Martinson E, Moran M, Wade F. Total versus robotic-assisted unicompartmental knee replacement (TRAKER) for medial compartment osteorthritis: a randomized controlled trial. Bone Jt Open. 2025 Feb 10;6(2):164-177. doi: 10.1302/2633-1462.62.BJO-2024-0155.R1.
- Home page of Edinburgh OrthopaedicsLink provided by the sponsor.
- Individual participant dataSharing planned: No. There is no plan to make individual patient data available.
Related trials for Osteo Arthritis Knee
Not yet recruitingPhase 3
A Study to Evaluate Efficacy and Safety of a Single Intra-Articular Injection of HL-01 in the Treatment of Pain in Symptomatic Knee Osteoarthritis
Osteo Arthritis of the Knee
Enrolling by invitationObservational study
Persona SoluTion PPS Femur PMCF
Rhematoid Arthritis, Osteo Arthritis of the Knee
Not yet recruiting
The PERK Study: Predicting and Evaluating Response to Knee RFA Using fNIRS
Osteo Arthritis of the Knee, Pain
Recruiting
Comparison of Distal IPACK and Popliteal Plexus Block Combined With Femoral Triangle Block After Total Knee Arthroplasty
Osteo Arthritis of the Knee
Not yet recruitingPhase 2/3
Efficacy and Safety of GNSC-001 Intra-articular Injection for Knee Osteoarthritis
Knee Arthritis Osteoarthritis, Knee Arthritis, Osteoarthritis
Referral and contact
AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals. Contact the study team or a site listed below; they decide who can take part.
Nicholas D Clement, MD, PhD principal investigator
NHS Lothian
1 site in 1 country: see every site and its status.
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
A study testing MAKO™ Partial Knee Arthroplasty and Triathlon (Stryker) Total Knee Arthroplasty in people with Osteo Arthritis Knee and Arthritis Knee, run by NHS Lothian at 1 site in United Kingdom.
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 7 inclusion and 10 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: looking for participants now, as of the sponsor's last update on 23 Sep 2026. 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 United Kingdom. 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?
This study is still under way. Results are not available in the source record yet.
How can a doctor refer a patient or contact the research team?
Contact Nicholas D Clement, MD, PhD (+44 131 536 1000, nick.clement@nhslothian.scot.nhs.uk), or a site near the patient. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.
What does the primary outcome measure?
Oxford knee score (time frame: Baseline to 6 months). It is what the study was designed to measure, not a finding.
Where can I read the original study information?
On the ClinicalTrials.gov record for NCT05290818, which also lists 4 linked publications.
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 23 Sep 2026.