Skip to content

The personalKNEE Trial

Robotic Assisted Surgery Comparing Personalized Alignment Versus Mechanical Alignment of Total Knee Arthroplasty - A Randomized Controlled Trial

Status
Recruiting
Phases
Unknown
Study type
Interventional
Source
ClinicalTrials.gov
Registry ID
NCT06507046
Enrollment
152
Registered
2024-07-18
Start date
2024-08-25
Completion date
2035-05-01
Last updated
2026-07-21

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

Conditions

Knee Osteoarthritis

Brief summary

Robotic knee surgery makes it possible to adopt different alignment philosophies in total knee arthroplasty. The classical operation where the knee is placed in a neutral manner, the so called mechanical alignment, has been used for decades. The kinematical alignment has recently won popularity. With this technique the focus is to render the natural knee anatomy even if this means to end up with a varus or valgus position. In this study, the investigators will compare the mechanical alignment and kinematical alignment and test the patients clinically and with a special CT scan to see if this technique gives equal or better longevity of the implants.

Detailed description

Mechanical alignment (MA) has for many years been the most used surgical alignment technique in total knee arthroplasty (TKA). This means that regardless of constitutional native anatomy (i.e. valgus or varus), one strives to achieve a neutral coronal knee axis on postoperative x-rays (Hip-Knee-Ankle angle, HKA). To achieve MA, the cuts are made perpendicular to the mechanical axis, and subsequent soft tissue balancing is performed if necessary. However, many patients do not have a neutral knee alignment before they develop osteoarthritis. Several authors therefore advocate the personalized alignment (kinematic, KA or functional alignment, FA), where the aim is to restore the patient's original pre-arthritis anatomy and joint line. This means that tibial component placement in varus or valgus is accepted, despite the possible result of a postoperative non-neutral HKA axis. Studies indicate that good clinical results can be achieved in terms of range of motion (ROM) and patient reported outcome measures (PROMs) with these techniques, but it has not been tested properly in terms of activity measurements, strength testing or migration of implants. There is diversity in the literature regarding whether tibial component with too much deviation from a neutral axis can lead to increased migration and eventually aseptic solution. To date, only a few trials, with diverging results, have assessed migration of the implants implanted with KA or FA. The methods are so far perceived as controversial, despite the widespread use. KA or FA can be performed by manual conventional surgery; however, the newly introduced robotic assisted surgery probably yields higher accuracy and precision of the cuts during surgery. This makes robotic assisted surgery well suited for personalized surgery. Yet, it is claimed that because of diversity of the different features for planning and executing the surgery, each system should be evaluated separately, and not as a group. The investigators therefore planned this study to assess the efficacy of robotic assisted surgery comparing MA and personalized alignment (PA) techniques. Aims of the trial 1. Evaluate the clinical outcomes of patients who have had TKA with PA and compare it with conventional MA. 2. Analyse and compare the in vivo stability over time of TKA operated with PA vs. MA using CT- based radiostereometric analysis (CT-RSA). 3. Evaluate the postoperative position of the implants using two different alignment philosophies. Objective Perform TKAs on patients using ROSA® Knee System (Zimmer Biomet, Warsaw, Indiana USA) robotic assisted surgery and randomize the patients to either PA or MA. Materials and methods A multiple blinded randomized controlled parallel superiority trial will be performed, where the patients, study nurse, statistician and physiotherapists are blinded to the surgical method (PA or MA). The study will include 152 patients. The study adheres to the consort statement. Surgery All surgeons involved in the trial are experienced knee surgeons. The surgeons have received thorough tutoring in the use of the ROSA Knee System and the Persona TKA, and both alignment techniques have now been adopted in our standard treatment of end stage OA. The learning curve of robotic assisted surgery is probably very small, and more related to time spent on the procedure rather than placement of the implants. The placement of the tibial implant will be restricted in the coronal plane to maximum 5 degrees of varus and 2 degrees of valgus. In sagittal plane, the slope will be limited to between 0-10 degrees. The Persona TKA implant although contemporary, is a well-documented implant with very low migration. The MA and PA techniques are well known and already used in a widespread fashion all around the world. Several clinics in Norway have also adopted the methods. Implantation of tantalum markers in bone and polyethylene has been performed for more than 40 years in numerous studies without any known complications. Known but rare complications to robotic surgery are fractures at the site of insertion of the bone pins, and pin site infections. In elderly or osteoporotic patients, the surgeons will consider using unicortical engagement of the pins. Concerning infections, all the default precautions in the OR will be taken, such as preoperative and postoperative administration of antibiotics, strict sterile procedures etc.

Interventions

PROCEDURETotal knee replacement

Mechanical or Personalized alignment

Sponsors

Helse Møre og Romsdal HF
Lead SponsorOTHER_GOV
Oslo University Hospital
CollaboratorOTHER
National Taiwan Normal University
CollaboratorOTHER
University of Oslo
CollaboratorOTHER
Sectra AB
CollaboratorUNKNOWN

Study design

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

Masking description

Patient, nurses and physiotherapists are blinded. Surgeon is of course not blinded.

Intervention model description

Randomized controlled trial

Eligibility

Sex/Gender
ALL
Age
18 Years to 80 Years
Healthy volunteers
No

Inclusion criteria

• femoro-tibial or patello-femoral osteoarthritis (Kellgren-Lawrence, K-L) grade 2-4 with persistent pain, referred to Kristiansund Hospital for primary TKA

Exclusion criteria

* serious psychiatric disorders * dementia * drug abuse * patients not able to speak and read Norwegian language making them noncompliant or unable to perform an informed consent * Patients with ongoing cancer therapy * Patients with ASA (The American Society of Anesthesiologists physical status class risk stratification system) classification \>3 * Patients in the need of walking aid devices * Patients in need of primary revision arthroplasty or more than 15 degrees of varus or 5 degrees of valgus on preoperative HKA images.

Design outcomes

Primary

MeasureTime frameDescription
MTPM2 yearsMaximum Total Point Motion measured by CT -based RSA in millimeters.

Secondary

MeasureTime frameDescription
XYZ translation2 yearsTranslation of implant measured by CT -based RSA in millimeters
XYZ rotation2 yearsRotation of implant measured by CT -based RSA in degrees
Steps per day1 year and 2 yearsActivePAL accelerator registration of mean steps per day measured 24/7 for a week
Walking speed1 and 2 yearsActivePAL accelerator registration of mean meter per second measured 24/7 for a week
Stair climbing1 and 2 yearsStandardized climbing and descending of stairs up and down. Time in seconds measured up, down and total.
Maximal voluntary contraction flexion1 and 2 yearsIsometric contraction at 90 degrees knee flexion measured in Newtons with Tindeq force cell
Maximal voluntary contraction extension1 and 2 yearsIsometric contraction at 90 degrees knee extension measured in Newtons with Tindeq force cell
Maximal voluntary contraction1 and 2 yearsIsometric contraction at 90 degrees knee flexion measured in Newtons with Tindeq force cell
Sit to stand test1 and 2 yearsMaximum number of repetitive transitions from sitting on a chair to standing without the use of hands during 30 seconds
KOOS score1 and 2 yearsKnee Injury and Osteoarthritis of 5 dimensions measuring activity of daily living (ADL), Quality of life, Sport and recreation, pain and symptoms. From 0 (bad) to 100 (excellent)
FJS1 and 2 yearsForgotten Joint Score is a 12 item scale assessing the ability to forget the operated joint as artificial during activities of daily living. Ranges from 0 (bad) to 100 (excellent)
Eq-5D1 and 2 yearsEuroQol 5 Dimensions is a generic patient reported outcome measure measuring quality of life. The scale ranges from 100 ('the best imaginable health state') to 0 ('the worst imaginable health state' ).
VAS1 and 2 yearsThe Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) measures pain intensity. The VAS consists of a 10cm line, with two end points representing 0 ('no pain') and 10 ('pain as bad as it could possibly be')

Countries

Norway

Contacts

CONTACTMyrhle Hoel, Nurse
Myrthle.Slettvag.Hoel@helse-mr.no71120000
CONTACTFrank-David Øhrn, MD, PhD
frank-david.ohrn@helse-mr.no91824169
STUDY_DIRECTORFrank-David Øhrn, MD, PhD

Møre og Romsdal Hospital Trust

STUDY_CHAIRKirsti Sevaldsen, MD, PhD

Møre og Romsdal Hospital Trust

Outcome results

None listed

Source: ClinicalTrials.gov · Data processed: Jul 22, 2026