Skip to content

Cemented vs. Cementless TKA

What Are the Results of Cemented vs. Cementless TKA With the Same Implant Design? A Randomized Clinical Trial.

Status
Terminated
Phases
NA
Study type
Interventional
Source
ClinicalTrials.gov
Registry ID
NCT04597684
Enrollment
17
Registered
2020-10-22
Start date
2020-09-29
Completion date
2021-10-21
Last updated
2022-04-08

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

Conditions

Total Knee Arthroplasty (TKA)

Brief summary

The investigators are evaluating an implant (Depuy Attune TKA) that was recently released to market with a cementless design that is yet to have long term comparative data between this cementless design or cemented options. The investigators are conducting a study to compare the results of this cementless design to the cemented design of the same implant.

Detailed description

Aseptic Loosening remains a leading cause for revision following TKA. Cemented TKAs have shown high failure rates in obese and younger populations. There is renewed interest in biologic fixation of total knee components with a more active and younger patient population, as well as long term alternatives in obese patients receiving TKA. Questions remain whether cemented or cementless long term fixation is superior in total knee arthroplasty in these populations. Potential benefits of cementless fixation include preservation of bone, decreased operative times, and elimination of complications specific to cemented components. Older cementless TKA designs had higher failure rates due to poor fixation methods, patch porous coating on the implant, poor tibial locking mechanisms and the use of conventional polyethylene. The combination of these factors led to unacceptable failure rates in these devices. Newer designs have looked to improve these flaws with advances in the biologic interface, use of highly porous metals, improved locking mechanisms, and cross-linked polyethylene. Recently, cementless implants with these improved design features have shown improved long term outcomes of cementless components versus their cemented predecessors. The combination of these improved long term outcomes in younger, more active population warrant further investigation of cementless components in TKA. There is a need for more durable, long term fixation in all implants treating obese, as well as young active patients. The investigators are evaluating an implant (Depuy Attune TKA) that was recently released to market with a cementless design that is yet to have long term comparative data between this cementless design or cemented options. The investigators are conducting a study to compare the results of this cementless design to the cemented design of the same implant.

Interventions

Total Knee Arthroplasty (TKA) with cementless knees

Total Knee Arthroplasty (TKA) with cemented knees

Sponsors

OrthoCarolina Research Institute, Inc.
Lead SponsorOTHER

Study design

Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Intervention model
PARALLEL
Primary purpose
OTHER
Masking
NONE

Eligibility

Sex/Gender
ALL
Age
18 Years to 65 Years
Healthy volunteers
No

Inclusion criteria

1. Evaluation for TKA at OrthoCarolina 2. Evaluated and scheduled for TKA by Drs. Keith Fehring, Bo Mason, William Griffin, Thomas Fehring, or Jesse Otero 3. Determined by the above surgeon to be a candidate for the Attune Posterior Stabilized knee system, with the patella to be resurfaced during surgery 4. \>18 years of age at enrollment

Exclusion criteria

1. Previous surgery with hardware on the joint of interest 2. \>= 65 years old at the time of TKA surgery 3. Previous diagnosis of inflammatory disease (RA, inflammatory arthropathy, any autoimmune disease) 4. BMI \<= 40 5. Physician discretion due to not being able to follow standard-of-care (SOC) TKA follow up protocol 6. History of contralateral TKA 7. Current Tobacco Use

Design outcomes

Primary

MeasureTime frameDescription
Revision for looseningWithin 20 years of study surgeryDid the subject have a revision procedure due to loosening (yes/no)

Secondary

MeasureTime frameDescription
Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score for Joint Replacement (KOOS Jr.)PreOperative, 3 months, 6 months, 1 year, 2 year, 5 year, 10 year, 15 year, 20 yearPatient-reported outcome of knee stiffness, pain, and function of daily living.
The Veterans RAND 12-Item Health Survey (VR-12)PreOperative, 3 months, 6 months, 1 year, 2 year, 5 year, 10 year, 15 year, 20 yearGeneral Health survey
Radiographic evidence of looseningPreOperative, 3 months, 6 months, 1 year, 2 year, 5 year, 10 year, 15 year, 20 yearRadiographic evidence of loosening

Other

MeasureTime frameDescription
Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI)PreOperativeEvaluation of a subject's mortality risk

Countries

United States

Outcome results

None listed

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