Skip to content

All-Polyethylene Tibias in TKA: PS vs CS Implants

All-Polyethylene Tibial Components in Total Knee Arthroplasty: A Radiostereometric Analysis Comparing Posterior Stabilizing and Condylar Stabilizing Implants

Status
Withdrawn
Phases
NA
Study type
Interventional
Source
ClinicalTrials.gov
Registry ID
NCT03569670
Enrollment
0
Registered
2018-06-26
Start date
2020-01-31
Completion date
2022-08-31
Last updated
2021-09-14

For informational purposes only — not medical advice. Sourced from public registries and may not reflect the latest updates. Terms

Conditions

Osteoarthritis, Knee

Keywords

cost, total knee replacement, arthroplasty, posterior stabilized, cruciate retaining, all-polyethylene

Brief summary

This is a randomized control trial where patients will be randomized to receive one of two types of total knee arthroplasty (TKA) all-polyethylene (AP) tibial components: cruciate retaining (CR) or posterior stabilized (PS). We will use radiostereometric analysis to assess the stability of the implants at 6 weeks, 3 months, 6 months, 1 year and 2 year post-operatively. The main objective of this project will be to determine which AP tibial component offers the greatest stability. Additionally, we will seek to determine whether patient BMI significantly impacts the stability of AP tibial components.

Detailed description

With healthcare expenditures rising as our population ages, there have been significant efforts targeted towards streamlining costs associated with various medical treatments. One area of substantial spending in the orthopaedic surgery field is total joint replacements. The effort to reduce costs has sparked a renewed interest in the use of allpolyethylene (AP) tibial components in total knee arthroplasty (TKA). In recent years, there has been ample research demonstrating that AP tibial components have performed as good as, or better, than metal-backed (MB) tibial components. Some studies have estimated that cost savings could be as high as 50% with routine use of AP tibial components. While sufficient literature exists demonstrating the equivalence or superiority of AP versus MB designs, there is a paucity of work done comparing different types of AP tibial components. Tibial components in TKA can be of the posterior stabilizing (PS) or cruciate retaining (CR) variety. To date, we are unaware of any study that directly compares AP tibial PS components to AP tibial CR components. Radiostereometric analysis (RSA) has evolved as an exceptionally precise and reliable method for assessing the migration of components in total joint arthroplasty. Using RSA data, it is possible to accurately predict, within the first 24 months post-operatively, the survival of a total joint arthroplasty. Furthermore, the use of RSA outcomes in arthroplasty research allows for adequately powered studies with significantly smaller sample sizes than previously required. The main objective of this project will be to determine which AP tibial component offers the greatest stability. Additionally, we will seek to determine whether patient body mass index (BMI) significantly impacts the stability of AP tibial components. We will prospectively enroll patients who will be undergoing a total knee arthroplasty by one of the study investigators. Potentially eligible patients will have the project explained to them during their preadmission clinic visit prior to surgery and if interested a member of the research team will perform the informed consent process. Should a patient elect to participate in the study they will sign the informed consent form and complete demographics and baseline health related quality of life questionnaires including Oxford Knee, EQ-5D, and the VR-12, in addition to the Western Ontario McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) which is already completed as per standard of care. The baseline demographic characteristics that will be collected include age, BMI, gender, and relevant medical comorbidities. Patients will be randomized to have either a PS or CR all-poly tibial component used during surgery. Randomization will be stratified by BMI to ensure equal distribution in both groups. During surgery the surgeon will insert 6-9 tantalum beads in the proximal tibial, 6 beads in the polyeythylene tray, and another bead into the tip of the polyethylene stem. These beads will be used to measure migration of the implants on RSA imaging (radiostereometric analysis). The RSA x-rays will be taken at baseline (2 weeks) and at the 6-week, 3 months, 6 months and 1 year and 2 year follow-up appointments. These images will be taken at Robarts Research Institute in the RSA analysis suite. At the 3month, 6 month, 1 year and 2 year visits we will also collect health related quality of life questionnaires including the WOMAC, Oxford Knee, EQ-5D and the VR-12. Patients and data collector will be blinded to treatment arm. The person who will analyze the RSA images will be able to see which treatment arm participants belong to (based on viewing xrays) however the hypothesis of the study will not be revealed to them prior to analysis. Intra-operative cost information will also be collected using institutional cost data in order to compare differences in OR costs between the two implant designs and across BMI categories.

Interventions

DEVICEPosterior stabilized all-polyethylene tibial component

Patients randomized to this arm will have a Triathlon implant with a posterior stabilized, all-polyethylene tibial component used during surgery.

DEVICECruciate retaining all-polyethylene tibial component

Patients randomized to this arm will have a Triathlon implant with a cruciate retaining, all-polyethylene tibial component used during surgery.

Sponsors

University of Western Ontario, Canada
CollaboratorOTHER
London Health Sciences Centre Research Institute OR Lawson Research Institute of St. Joseph's
Lead SponsorOTHER

Study design

Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Intervention model
PARALLEL
Primary purpose
TREATMENT
Masking
DOUBLE (Subject, Outcomes Assessor)

Eligibility

Sex/Gender
ALL
Age
18 Years to No maximum
Healthy volunteers
No

Inclusion criteria

* osteoarthritis * primary total knee arthroplasty * able to consent for themself

Exclusion criteria

* inflammatory arthropathy * fibromyalgia * chronic pain syndrome * previous distal femur or proximal tibia open reduction internal fixation

Design outcomes

Primary

MeasureTime frameDescription
Implant MigrationChange between baseline (taken at 2 weeks post-operatively) and 2 yearsComparison of the two component types using radiostereometric analysis imaging.

Secondary

MeasureTime frameDescription
VR-122 yearsPatient-reported outcome used to assess general health.
Western Ontario McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC)2 yearsPatient-reported outcome used to assess function, pain and stiffness.
Oxford Knee Score2 yearsPatient-reported outcome used to assess knee function.
EQ-5D2 yearsPatient-reported outcome used to assess quality of life.
CostIntraoperativeIntraoperative costs will be collected using institutional cost data.

Countries

Canada

Outcome results

None listed

Source: ClinicalTrials.gov · Data processed: Feb 4, 2026