Skip to content

Study to Evaluate the Safety and Effectiveness of REAL INTELLIGENCE™ CORI™ in Unicondylar Knee Arthroplasty (UKA) Procedures

A Prospective, Multi-center, Randomized Controlled Study to Evaluate the Safety and Effectiveness of REAL INTELLIGENCE™ CORI™ in Unicondylar Knee Arthroplasty (UKA) Procedures

Status
Terminated
Phases
NA
Study type
Interventional
Source
ClinicalTrials.gov
Registry ID
NCT04797897
Acronym
CORI RCT UKA
Enrollment
4
Registered
2021-03-15
Start date
2022-02-12
Completion date
2024-02-16
Last updated
2025-03-25

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

Conditions

Avascular Necrosis, Fracture, Knee, Non-inflammatory Degenerative Joint Disease, Osteoarthritis, Requires Correction of Functional Deformity

Keywords

osteoarthritis

Brief summary

This is a prospective study to demonstrate the safety and effectiveness of CORI and to register CORI in China mainland.

Detailed description

This is a prospective, multi-center, randomized study to demonstrate the safety and effectiveness of CORI. In addition, the study will support regulatory approval by the National Medical Products Administration (NMPA) in China. The study will have two arms, the investigational group will be total knee arthroplasty (TKA) using CORI, the comparison group will be conventional approach with conventional manual instrumentation.

Interventions

DEVICECORI

unicondylar knee arthroplasty (UKA) treated with CORI

DEVICEConventional

unicondylar knee arthroplasty (UKA) treated with conventional approach with conventional manual instrumentation

Sponsors

Smith & Nephew, Inc.
Lead SponsorINDUSTRY

Study design

Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Intervention model
PARALLEL
Primary purpose
TREATMENT
Masking
NONE

Eligibility

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

Inclusion criteria

1. Subject is a suitable candidate for a UKA procedure using CORI and a compatible S+N Knee implant system. 2. Subject requires a cemented UKA as a primary indication that meets any of the following conditions: 1. Non-inflammatory degenerative joint disease, including osteoarthritis 2. Avascular necrosis 3. Requires correction of functional deformity 4. Requires treatment of fractures that were unmanageable using other techniques 3. Subject is of legal age to consent and considered skeletally mature (≥ 18 years of age at the time of surgery). 4. Subject agrees to consent to and to follow the study visit schedule (as defined in the study protocol and informed consent form), by signing the Ethics Committee (EC) or Institutional Review Board (IRB) approved informed consent form. 5. Subject plans to be available through one (1) year postoperative follow-up. 6. Applicable routine radiographic assessment if possible.

Exclusion criteria

1. Subject receives a UKA on the index joint as a revision for a previously failed surgery, or need for complex implants, or any other implant than a standard UKA (e.g. stems, augments, or custom made devices). 2. Subject has been diagnosed with post-traumatic arthritis 3. Subject receives simultaneous bilateral UKA OR a unilateral UKA with contralateral TKA. 4. Subject has one or more of the following arthroplasties that are not fully healed and well-functioning, as determined by the investigator:-Contralateral primary TKA or UKA, however, the subject can only have one knee enrolled in this study. 5. Subject does not understand the language used in the Informed Consent Form. 6. Subject does not meet the indication or is contraindicated for UKA according to specific S+N knee system's Instructions For Use (IFU). 7. Subject has active infection or sepsis (treated or untreated). 8. Subject is morbidly obese with a body mass index (BMI) greater than 40. 9. Subject is pregnant or breast feeding at the time of surgery. 10. Subject, in the opinion of the Investigator, has advanced osteoarthritis or joint disease at the time of surgery and was better suited for an alternate procedure. 11. Subject currently enrolled in another orthopedic clinical trial study. 12. Subject has a condition(s) that may interfere with the UKA survival or outcome (i.e., Paget's or Charcot's disease, vascular insufficiency, muscular atrophy, uncontrolled diabetes, moderate to severe renal insufficiency or neuromuscular disease, or an active, local infection). 13. Subject in the opinion of the Investigator has an emotional or neurological condition that would pre-empt their ability or willingness to participate in the study including mental illness, intellectual disability, drug or alcohol abuse. 14. Subject, in the opinion of the Investigator, has a neuromuscular disorder that prohibited control of the index joint. 15. Subject is a prisoner or meets the definition of a Vulnerable Subject per ISO 14155:2020 Section 3.55.

Design outcomes

Primary

MeasureTime frameDescription
Post-operative Leg Alignment6 weeksThe number of participants with knees achieving post-operative leg alignment was taken by radiographic assessment at 6 weeks. Post-operative leg alignment was achieved when the deviation from the participant specific target did not exceed ±3 degrees.

Secondary

MeasureTime frameDescription
Component Alignment: Tibial Antero-Posterior (A/P) Angle6 weeksComponent alignment assessed on long leg standing antero-posterior (A/P) X-rays and standard non weight bearing lateral X-rays taken 6 weeks after surgery. From the A/P radiograph, the tibial angle denotes the angle formed on the medial side of the knee from intersecting lines parallel to the tibial base plate and a line drawn parallel to the tibial canal.
Component Alignment: Total Antero-Posterior (A/P) Valgus Angle6 weeksComponent alignment assessed on long leg standing antero-posterior (A/P) X-rays and standard non weight bearing lateral X-rays taken 6 weeks after surgery. The total valgus angle is the sum of the femoral flexion angle and the tibial angle.
Component Alignment: Lateral View Femoral Flexion Angle6 weeksComponent alignment assessed on long leg standing antero-posterior (A/P) X-rays and standard non weight bearing lateral X-rays taken 6 weeks after surgery. The lateral view femoral flexion angle in degrees was obtained from the intersection of a line from the center of the femoral implant to the top of the femur with a line through the femoral canal. The angle is measured on the proximal side of the intersection.
Component Alignment: Lateral View Tibial Angle6 weeksComponent alignment assessed on long leg standing antero-posterior (A/P) X-rays and standard non weight bearing lateral X-rays taken 6 weeks after surgery. The lateral view tibial angle in degrees was obtained from the intersection of a line drawn parallel to the bottom of the tibial base insert and a line through the center of the tibial base and the tibial canal.
Radiographic Assessment12 monthsRadiographic assessment measured by number of participants with any radiographic finds on antero-posterior (A/P) and lateral (L) views (yes/no). Radiographic findings indicated the presence of radiolucent lines, osteolysis & implant migration.
2011 Knee Society Score (KSS): Objective Knee ScoreBaseline, 6 weeks, 6 months, and 12 monthsThe 2011 Knee Society Score consists of 4 separate sub-scales. The Objective Knee Score is seven items with a range of 0 to 100, with a higher score indicating a better outcome.
Component Alignment: Femoral Antero-Posterior (A/P) Angle6 weeksComponent alignment assessed on long leg standing antero-posterior (A/P) X-rays and standard non weight bearing lateral X-rays taken 6 weeks after surgery. From the A/P radiograph, the femoral flexion angle in degrees was obtained using standard radiographic tools. Femoral flexion angle is defined as the angle formed between a line across the base of the femoral condyles and a line that is centered along the femoral canal.
2011 Knee Society Score (KSS): Expectation ScoreBaseline, 6 weeks, 6 months, and 12 monthsThe 2011 Knee Society Score consists of 4 separate sub-scales. The Patient Expectation Score is three items with a range of 0 to 15, with a higher score indicating a better outcome. The Expectation score indicates the patient's opinion on the extent they expect the operation to improve their knee pain, and ability to perform activities of daily living and recreational activities.
2011 Knee Society Score (KSS): Functional ScoreBaseline, 6 weeks, 6 months, and 12 monthsThe 2011 Knee Society Score consists of 4 separate sub-scales. The Functional Score is nineteen items with a range of 0 to 100, with a higher score indicating a better outcome. Functional Score is derived from assessments of walking and standing, standard activities, advanced activities, and discretionary activities.
Oxford Knee Score (OKS)Baseline, 6 weeks, 6 months, and 12 monthsThe Oxford Knee Score (OKS) is a Patient Reported Outcome questionnaire that was developed to assess perceived function and pain answered on a Likert scale. Responses to each question ranges from 0-4 with a range of a possible overall score from 0-48. A score of 0 is the worst possible outcome while a score of 48 is the best possible outcome.
Forgotten Joint Score (FJS)6 weeks, 6 months, and 12 monthsThe Forgotten Joint Score (FJS) comprises measures for the assessment of joint-specific patient reported outcomes. Participants are asked to rate their awareness of their knee arthroplasty in 12 questions with a five point Likert response format: Never, almost never, seldom, sometimes and mostly. The item scores are summed and linearly transformed in a 0 to 100 scale with a high value reflecting the ability of the subject to forget about the replaced knee joint during the activities of daily living (i.e., a higher score is a better outcome).
Five-level EuroQol Five-dimensional (EQ-5D-5L): Index ScoreBaseline, 6 weeks, 6 months, and 12 monthsThe EQ-5D-5L score consists of two parts: a descriptive system and a visual analogue scale (VAS). The descriptive system (i.e., index score) is used to describe the participant's health state and consists of five dimensions: mobility, self-care, usual activities, pain/discomfort and anxiety/depression. Each dimension has 5 levels to choose the most appropriate answer: no problems, slight problems, moderate problems, severe problems and extreme problems. The participant is asked to indicate their health state by marking the most appropriate statement in each of the five areas. The EQ-5D-5L Index Score was based on a scale of 0 to 1, with higher index values indicating better health and lower index values indicating worse health.
Five-level EuroQol Five-dimensional (EQ-5D-5L): Visal Analogue Scale (VAS) ScoreBaseline, 6 weeks, 6 months, and 12 monthsThe EQ-5D-5L score consists of two parts: a descriptive system and a visual analogue scale (VAS). The VAS records the participant's self-rated health on a vertical visual analogue scale. The scale ranges from 0 to 100 where 0 indicates 'The worst health you can imagine' and 100 indicates 'The best health you can imagine'.
2011 Knee Society Score (KSS): Satisfaction Knee ScoreBaseline, 6 weeks, 6 months, and 12 monthsThe 2011 Knee Society Score consists of 4 separate sub-scales. The Patient Satisfaction Score is five items with a range of 0 to 40, with a higher score indicating a better outcome.

Countries

Australia, Hong Kong, New Zealand

Participant flow

Pre-assignment details

There were 4 participants enrolled & randomized into the study with each contributing one study knee.

Participants by arm

ArmCount
CORI UKA
Subjects in need for unicondylar knee arthroplasty (UKA) as decided by their doctor and treated with CORI. CORI: unicondylar knee arthroplasty (UKA) treated with CORI
2
Conventional UKA
Subjects in need for unicondylar knee arthroplasty (UKA) as decided by their doctor and treated with conventional approach with conventional manual instrumentation. Conventional: unicondylar knee arthroplasty (UKA) treated with conventional approach with conventional manual instrumentation
2
Total4

Withdrawals & dropouts

PeriodReasonFG000FG001
Overall StudyStudy Termination by Sponsor11

Baseline characteristics

CharacteristicCORI UKATotalConventional UKA
Age, Categorical
<=18 years
0 Participants0 Participants0 Participants
Age, Categorical
>=65 years
1 Participants3 Participants2 Participants
Age, Categorical
Between 18 and 65 years
1 Participants1 Participants0 Participants
Ethnicity (NIH/OMB)
Hispanic or Latino
0 Participants0 Participants0 Participants
Ethnicity (NIH/OMB)
Not Hispanic or Latino
2 Participants4 Participants2 Participants
Ethnicity (NIH/OMB)
Unknown or Not Reported
0 Participants0 Participants0 Participants
Race (NIH/OMB)
American Indian or Alaska Native
0 Participants0 Participants0 Participants
Race (NIH/OMB)
Asian
1 Participants1 Participants0 Participants
Race (NIH/OMB)
Black or African American
0 Participants0 Participants0 Participants
Race (NIH/OMB)
More than one race
0 Participants0 Participants0 Participants
Race (NIH/OMB)
Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander
0 Participants0 Participants0 Participants
Race (NIH/OMB)
Unknown or Not Reported
0 Participants0 Participants0 Participants
Race (NIH/OMB)
White
1 Participants3 Participants2 Participants
Region of Enrollment
Australia
0 participants1 participants1 participants
Region of Enrollment
Hong Kong
1 participants1 participants0 participants
Region of Enrollment
New Zealand
1 participants2 participants1 participants
Sex: Female, Male
Female
2 Participants3 Participants1 Participants
Sex: Female, Male
Male
0 Participants1 Participants1 Participants

Adverse events

Event typeEG000
affected / at risk
EG001
affected / at risk
deaths
Total, all-cause mortality
0 / 20 / 2
other
Total, other adverse events
2 / 21 / 2
serious
Total, serious adverse events
1 / 21 / 2

Outcome results

Primary

Post-operative Leg Alignment

The number of participants with knees achieving post-operative leg alignment was taken by radiographic assessment at 6 weeks. Post-operative leg alignment was achieved when the deviation from the participant specific target did not exceed ±3 degrees.

Time frame: 6 weeks

Population: Overall number of participants analyzed included those enrolled in the study with data collected for the outcome and time frame specified. Leg alignment not collected for 1 participant in CORI UKA group, and target data was not collected for 1 participant in Conventional UKA group.

ArmMeasureValue (COUNT_OF_PARTICIPANTS)
CORI UKAPost-operative Leg Alignment1 Participants
Conventional UKAPost-operative Leg Alignment1 Participants
Secondary

2011 Knee Society Score (KSS): Expectation Score

The 2011 Knee Society Score consists of 4 separate sub-scales. The Patient Expectation Score is three items with a range of 0 to 15, with a higher score indicating a better outcome. The Expectation score indicates the patient's opinion on the extent they expect the operation to improve their knee pain, and ability to perform activities of daily living and recreational activities.

Time frame: Baseline, 6 weeks, 6 months, and 12 months

Population: Overall number of participants analyzed included those enrolled with data collected for the outcome and time frame specified.

ArmMeasureGroupValue (MEAN)Dispersion
CORI UKA2011 Knee Society Score (KSS): Expectation ScoreBaseline13 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 1.41
CORI UKA2011 Knee Society Score (KSS): Expectation Score6 weeks9.5 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 3.54
CORI UKA2011 Knee Society Score (KSS): Expectation Score6 months11 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 5.66
CORI UKA2011 Knee Society Score (KSS): Expectation Score12 months8 score on a scale
Conventional UKA2011 Knee Society Score (KSS): Expectation Score12 months9 score on a scale
Conventional UKA2011 Knee Society Score (KSS): Expectation ScoreBaseline11 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 1.41
Conventional UKA2011 Knee Society Score (KSS): Expectation Score6 months10 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 1.41
Conventional UKA2011 Knee Society Score (KSS): Expectation Score6 weeks8.5 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 3.54
Secondary

2011 Knee Society Score (KSS): Functional Score

The 2011 Knee Society Score consists of 4 separate sub-scales. The Functional Score is nineteen items with a range of 0 to 100, with a higher score indicating a better outcome. Functional Score is derived from assessments of walking and standing, standard activities, advanced activities, and discretionary activities.

Time frame: Baseline, 6 weeks, 6 months, and 12 months

Population: Overall number of participants analyzed included those enrolled with data collected for the outcome and time frame specified.

ArmMeasureGroupValue (MEAN)Dispersion
CORI UKA2011 Knee Society Score (KSS): Functional ScoreBaseline30 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 11.31
CORI UKA2011 Knee Society Score (KSS): Functional Score6 weeks37.5 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 16.26
CORI UKA2011 Knee Society Score (KSS): Functional Score6 months59 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 7.07
CORI UKA2011 Knee Society Score (KSS): Functional Score12 months60 score on a scale
Conventional UKA2011 Knee Society Score (KSS): Functional Score12 months83 score on a scale
Conventional UKA2011 Knee Society Score (KSS): Functional ScoreBaseline35.5 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 4.95
Conventional UKA2011 Knee Society Score (KSS): Functional Score6 months72.5 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 2.12
Conventional UKA2011 Knee Society Score (KSS): Functional Score6 weeks52 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 19.8
Secondary

2011 Knee Society Score (KSS): Objective Knee Score

The 2011 Knee Society Score consists of 4 separate sub-scales. The Objective Knee Score is seven items with a range of 0 to 100, with a higher score indicating a better outcome.

Time frame: Baseline, 6 weeks, 6 months, and 12 months

Population: Overall number of participants analyzed included those enrolled with data collected for the outcome and time frame specified.

ArmMeasureGroupValue (MEAN)Dispersion
CORI UKA2011 Knee Society Score (KSS): Objective Knee ScoreBaseline49 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 32.53
CORI UKA2011 Knee Society Score (KSS): Objective Knee Score6 weeks62.5 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 4.95
CORI UKA2011 Knee Society Score (KSS): Objective Knee Score6 months61.5 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 4.95
CORI UKA2011 Knee Society Score (KSS): Objective Knee Score12 months70 score on a scale
Conventional UKA2011 Knee Society Score (KSS): Objective Knee Score12 months49 score on a scale
Conventional UKA2011 Knee Society Score (KSS): Objective Knee ScoreBaseline33.5 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 3.54
Conventional UKA2011 Knee Society Score (KSS): Objective Knee Score6 months50.5 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 17.68
Conventional UKA2011 Knee Society Score (KSS): Objective Knee Score6 weeks57 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 7.07
Secondary

2011 Knee Society Score (KSS): Satisfaction Knee Score

The 2011 Knee Society Score consists of 4 separate sub-scales. The Patient Satisfaction Score is five items with a range of 0 to 40, with a higher score indicating a better outcome.

Time frame: Baseline, 6 weeks, 6 months, and 12 months

Population: Overall number of participants analyzed included those enrolled with data collected for the outcome and time frame specified.

ArmMeasureGroupValue (MEAN)Dispersion
CORI UKA2011 Knee Society Score (KSS): Satisfaction Knee ScoreBaseline19 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 1.41
CORI UKA2011 Knee Society Score (KSS): Satisfaction Knee Score6 weeks24 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 0
CORI UKA2011 Knee Society Score (KSS): Satisfaction Knee Score6 months28 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 2.83
CORI UKA2011 Knee Society Score (KSS): Satisfaction Knee Score12 months34 score on a scale
Conventional UKA2011 Knee Society Score (KSS): Satisfaction Knee Score12 months30 score on a scale
Conventional UKA2011 Knee Society Score (KSS): Satisfaction Knee ScoreBaseline10 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 2.83
Conventional UKA2011 Knee Society Score (KSS): Satisfaction Knee Score6 months26 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 2.83
Conventional UKA2011 Knee Society Score (KSS): Satisfaction Knee Score6 weeks23 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 4.24
Secondary

Component Alignment: Femoral Antero-Posterior (A/P) Angle

Component alignment assessed on long leg standing antero-posterior (A/P) X-rays and standard non weight bearing lateral X-rays taken 6 weeks after surgery. From the A/P radiograph, the femoral flexion angle in degrees was obtained using standard radiographic tools. Femoral flexion angle is defined as the angle formed between a line across the base of the femoral condyles and a line that is centered along the femoral canal.

Time frame: 6 weeks

Population: Overall number of participants analyzed included those enrolled with data collected for the outcome and time frame specified.

ArmMeasureValue (MEAN)Dispersion
CORI UKAComponent Alignment: Femoral Antero-Posterior (A/P) Angle97 degrees
Conventional UKAComponent Alignment: Femoral Antero-Posterior (A/P) Angle95 degreesStandard Deviation 1.41
Secondary

Component Alignment: Lateral View Femoral Flexion Angle

Component alignment assessed on long leg standing antero-posterior (A/P) X-rays and standard non weight bearing lateral X-rays taken 6 weeks after surgery. The lateral view femoral flexion angle in degrees was obtained from the intersection of a line from the center of the femoral implant to the top of the femur with a line through the femoral canal. The angle is measured on the proximal side of the intersection.

Time frame: 6 weeks

Population: Overall number of participants analyzed included those enrolled with data collected for the outcome and time frame specified.

ArmMeasureValue (MEAN)Dispersion
CORI UKAComponent Alignment: Lateral View Femoral Flexion Angle0 degrees
Conventional UKAComponent Alignment: Lateral View Femoral Flexion Angle5 degreesStandard Deviation 0
Secondary

Component Alignment: Lateral View Tibial Angle

Component alignment assessed on long leg standing antero-posterior (A/P) X-rays and standard non weight bearing lateral X-rays taken 6 weeks after surgery. The lateral view tibial angle in degrees was obtained from the intersection of a line drawn parallel to the bottom of the tibial base insert and a line through the center of the tibial base and the tibial canal.

Time frame: 6 weeks

Population: Overall number of participants analyzed included those enrolled with data collected for the outcome and time frame specified.

ArmMeasureValue (MEAN)Dispersion
CORI UKAComponent Alignment: Lateral View Tibial Angle86 degrees
Conventional UKAComponent Alignment: Lateral View Tibial Angle85.5 degreesStandard Deviation 0.71
Secondary

Component Alignment: Tibial Antero-Posterior (A/P) Angle

Component alignment assessed on long leg standing antero-posterior (A/P) X-rays and standard non weight bearing lateral X-rays taken 6 weeks after surgery. From the A/P radiograph, the tibial angle denotes the angle formed on the medial side of the knee from intersecting lines parallel to the tibial base plate and a line drawn parallel to the tibial canal.

Time frame: 6 weeks

Population: Overall number of participants analyzed included those enrolled with data collected for the outcome and time frame specified.

ArmMeasureValue (MEAN)Dispersion
CORI UKAComponent Alignment: Tibial Antero-Posterior (A/P) Angle84 degrees
Conventional UKAComponent Alignment: Tibial Antero-Posterior (A/P) Angle89 degreesStandard Deviation 5.66
Secondary

Component Alignment: Total Antero-Posterior (A/P) Valgus Angle

Component alignment assessed on long leg standing antero-posterior (A/P) X-rays and standard non weight bearing lateral X-rays taken 6 weeks after surgery. The total valgus angle is the sum of the femoral flexion angle and the tibial angle.

Time frame: 6 weeks

Population: Overall number of participants analyzed included those enrolled with data collected for the outcome and time frame specified.

ArmMeasureValue (MEAN)Dispersion
CORI UKAComponent Alignment: Total Antero-Posterior (A/P) Valgus Angle181 degrees
Conventional UKAComponent Alignment: Total Antero-Posterior (A/P) Valgus Angle184 degreesStandard Deviation 7.07
Secondary

Five-level EuroQol Five-dimensional (EQ-5D-5L): Index Score

The EQ-5D-5L score consists of two parts: a descriptive system and a visual analogue scale (VAS). The descriptive system (i.e., index score) is used to describe the participant's health state and consists of five dimensions: mobility, self-care, usual activities, pain/discomfort and anxiety/depression. Each dimension has 5 levels to choose the most appropriate answer: no problems, slight problems, moderate problems, severe problems and extreme problems. The participant is asked to indicate their health state by marking the most appropriate statement in each of the five areas. The EQ-5D-5L Index Score was based on a scale of 0 to 1, with higher index values indicating better health and lower index values indicating worse health.

Time frame: Baseline, 6 weeks, 6 months, and 12 months

Population: Overall number of participants analyzed included those enrolled with data collected for the outcome and time frame specified.

ArmMeasureGroupValue (MEAN)Dispersion
CORI UKAFive-level EuroQol Five-dimensional (EQ-5D-5L): Index ScoreBaseline0.71 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 0.03
CORI UKAFive-level EuroQol Five-dimensional (EQ-5D-5L): Index Score6 weeks0.69 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 0.13
CORI UKAFive-level EuroQol Five-dimensional (EQ-5D-5L): Index Score6 months0.81 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 0.02
CORI UKAFive-level EuroQol Five-dimensional (EQ-5D-5L): Index Score12 months0.80 score on a scale
Conventional UKAFive-level EuroQol Five-dimensional (EQ-5D-5L): Index Score12 months0.77 score on a scale
Conventional UKAFive-level EuroQol Five-dimensional (EQ-5D-5L): Index ScoreBaseline0.58 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 0.01
Conventional UKAFive-level EuroQol Five-dimensional (EQ-5D-5L): Index Score6 months0.83 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 0.04
Conventional UKAFive-level EuroQol Five-dimensional (EQ-5D-5L): Index Score6 weeks0.79 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 0.01
Secondary

Five-level EuroQol Five-dimensional (EQ-5D-5L): Visal Analogue Scale (VAS) Score

The EQ-5D-5L score consists of two parts: a descriptive system and a visual analogue scale (VAS). The VAS records the participant's self-rated health on a vertical visual analogue scale. The scale ranges from 0 to 100 where 0 indicates 'The worst health you can imagine' and 100 indicates 'The best health you can imagine'.

Time frame: Baseline, 6 weeks, 6 months, and 12 months

Population: Overall number of participants analyzed included those enrolled with data collected for the outcome and time frame specified.

ArmMeasureGroupValue (MEAN)Dispersion
CORI UKAFive-level EuroQol Five-dimensional (EQ-5D-5L): Visal Analogue Scale (VAS) ScoreBaseline67.5 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 17.68
CORI UKAFive-level EuroQol Five-dimensional (EQ-5D-5L): Visal Analogue Scale (VAS) Score6 weeks72.5 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 10.61
CORI UKAFive-level EuroQol Five-dimensional (EQ-5D-5L): Visal Analogue Scale (VAS) Score6 months85 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 7.07
CORI UKAFive-level EuroQol Five-dimensional (EQ-5D-5L): Visal Analogue Scale (VAS) Score12 months80 score on a scale
Conventional UKAFive-level EuroQol Five-dimensional (EQ-5D-5L): Visal Analogue Scale (VAS) Score12 months75 score on a scale
Conventional UKAFive-level EuroQol Five-dimensional (EQ-5D-5L): Visal Analogue Scale (VAS) ScoreBaseline55 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 7.07
Conventional UKAFive-level EuroQol Five-dimensional (EQ-5D-5L): Visal Analogue Scale (VAS) Score6 months72.5 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 17.68
Conventional UKAFive-level EuroQol Five-dimensional (EQ-5D-5L): Visal Analogue Scale (VAS) Score6 weeks72.5 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 10.61
Secondary

Forgotten Joint Score (FJS)

The Forgotten Joint Score (FJS) comprises measures for the assessment of joint-specific patient reported outcomes. Participants are asked to rate their awareness of their knee arthroplasty in 12 questions with a five point Likert response format: Never, almost never, seldom, sometimes and mostly. The item scores are summed and linearly transformed in a 0 to 100 scale with a high value reflecting the ability of the subject to forget about the replaced knee joint during the activities of daily living (i.e., a higher score is a better outcome).

Time frame: 6 weeks, 6 months, and 12 months

Population: Overall number of participants analyzed included those enrolled with data collected for the outcome and time frame specified.

ArmMeasureGroupValue (MEAN)Dispersion
CORI UKAForgotten Joint Score (FJS)6 weeks13.54 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 10.31
CORI UKAForgotten Joint Score (FJS)6 months52.08 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 8.84
CORI UKAForgotten Joint Score (FJS)12 months18.75 score on a scale
Conventional UKAForgotten Joint Score (FJS)6 weeks29.17 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 11.79
Conventional UKAForgotten Joint Score (FJS)6 months67.71 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 1.47
Conventional UKAForgotten Joint Score (FJS)12 months87.5 score on a scale
Secondary

Oxford Knee Score (OKS)

The Oxford Knee Score (OKS) is a Patient Reported Outcome questionnaire that was developed to assess perceived function and pain answered on a Likert scale. Responses to each question ranges from 0-4 with a range of a possible overall score from 0-48. A score of 0 is the worst possible outcome while a score of 48 is the best possible outcome.

Time frame: Baseline, 6 weeks, 6 months, and 12 months

Population: Overall number of participants analyzed included those enrolled with data collected for the outcome and time frame specified.

ArmMeasureGroupValue (MEAN)Dispersion
CORI UKAOxford Knee Score (OKS)Baseline22.5 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 0.71
CORI UKAOxford Knee Score (OKS)6 weeks16 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 2.83
CORI UKAOxford Knee Score (OKS)12 months38 score on a scale
CORI UKAOxford Knee Score (OKS)6 months35.5 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 0.71
Conventional UKAOxford Knee Score (OKS)6 months35 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 8.49
Conventional UKAOxford Knee Score (OKS)Baseline18.5 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 3.54
Conventional UKAOxford Knee Score (OKS)12 months41 score on a scale
Conventional UKAOxford Knee Score (OKS)6 weeks29.5 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 2.12
Secondary

Radiographic Assessment

Radiographic assessment measured by number of participants with any radiographic finds on antero-posterior (A/P) and lateral (L) views (yes/no). Radiographic findings indicated the presence of radiolucent lines, osteolysis & implant migration.

Time frame: 12 months

Population: Overall number of participants analyzed indicated those enrolled in the study with data collected for the outcome and time frame specified. Data was not collected for 2 participants due to the early termination of the study.

ArmMeasureCategoryValue (COUNT_OF_PARTICIPANTS)
CORI UKARadiographic AssessmentNo1 Participants
CORI UKARadiographic AssessmentYes0 Participants
Conventional UKARadiographic AssessmentNo1 Participants
Conventional UKARadiographic AssessmentYes0 Participants

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