Skip to content

Comparative Outcomes Between Imageless Robotic-assisted and Conventional Total Knee Arthroplasty

Comparative Outcomes Between Imageless Robotic-assisted and Conventional Total Knee Arthroplasty : A Prospective, Randomized Controlled Trial

Status
Completed
Phases
NA
Study type
Interventional
Source
ClinicalTrials.gov
Registry ID
NCT04307251
Enrollment
168
Registered
2020-03-13
Start date
2020-03-23
Completion date
2021-02-25
Last updated
2022-04-22

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

Conditions

Osteoarthritis, Knee

Brief summary

The purpose of this study is to compare post-operative mechanical alignment (Hip-Knee-Ankle angle; HKA) between imageless robotic-assisted (Navio™ Robotics-assisted Surgical System) and Conventional Total Knee Arthroplasty

Interventions

DEVICENavio™ Robotics-assisted Surgical System, LEGION Total Knee System

Robotic TKA uses computer software to convert anatomical information into a virtual patient-specific 3D reconstruction of the knee joint.The surgeon uses this virtual model to plan optimal bone resection, implant positioning, bone coverage, and limb alignment based on the patient's unique anatomy.

DEVICEConventional, LEGION Total Knee System

Total Knee Arthroplasty (TKA) is a widespread orthopaedic procedure for restoring functionality and minimizing pain due to end stage osteoarthritis. Conventional TKA, well-accepted as the standard of care, is performed with manual instrumentation guided by intramedullary or extramedullary alignment rods, as well as rotational guides that are not patient-specific.

Sponsors

Navamindradhiraj University
Lead SponsorOTHER

Study design

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

Eligibility

Sex/Gender
ALL
Healthy volunteers
No

Inclusion criteria

* Primary osteoarthritis of knee who were scheduled for a primary total knee arthroplasty * Age 50-80 year * Patients with osteoarthritis who voluntarily participated in the project

Exclusion criteria

* Patients with osteoporosis * History of inflammatory arthroplathy * Previous fracture or open surgery on the same knee * Patients with bilateral total knee arthroplasty * Patients osteoarthritis with revision surgery

Design outcomes

Primary

MeasureTime frameDescription
Mechanical axisChange from baseline mechanical axis at 6 weeks after surgeryPost-operative Mechanical Alignment; Hip-Knee-Ankle angle; If you divide the knee into quadrants, the ideal mechanical axis would bisect the knee (0), with medial zone (-1) or lateral zone (-1) being within physiologic range. With the notable exception of physiologic varus \<age 2 and physiologic valgus \<age 6, medial or lateral zones 2 or 3 would likely manifest symptoms and gait disturbance and thereby warrant surgical intervention

Secondary

MeasureTime frameDescription
Knee Society and Knee Society function scoreChange from baseline Knee Society and Knee Society function score at 3 months, 6 months, and 12 months after surgeryKnee Society and Knee Society function score (minimum 0, maximum 200)
Range of motion of kneeChange from baseline Range of motion of knee at 3 months, 6 months, and 12 months after surgeryRange of motion of knee (minimum 0, maximum 140)
Oxford knee scoreChange from baseline Oxford knee score 3 months, 6 months, and 12 months after surgeryOxford knee score (minimum 0, maximum 48)

Countries

Thailand

Outcome results

None listed

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