Skip to content

Comparison Between the Use of the Tensioner and Standard Surgical Technique for Ligament Balancing of Total Knee Prostheses

Comparison Between the Use of the Tensioner and Standard Surgical Technique for Ligament Balancing of Total Knee Prostheses

Status
Recruiting
Phases
Unknown
Study type
Interventional
Source
ClinicalTrials.gov
Registry ID
NCT06770153
Enrollment
200
Registered
2025-01-13
Start date
2024-10-11
Completion date
2026-10-01
Last updated
2026-01-26

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

Conditions

Knee Injuries

Keywords

Knee prosthesis, prosthesis, knee

Brief summary

the objective of the present study is to compare the post-operative laxity using stress radiographs and clinical scores in two groups of patients undergoing primary PS TKA with identical prosthetic model performed in two specialized centers, of which one group implanted with standard technique and one group through the intraoperative use of the tensioner

Interventions

PROCEDURETensor

balancing will be carried out using the TEMIS DePuy tensioner and carrying out any releases according to the gap-balancing technique

PROCEDUREstandard

primary TKA implantation with ligament balancing without use of the tensioner

Sponsors

Istituto Ortopedico Rizzoli
Lead SponsorOTHER

Study design

Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Intervention model
PARALLEL
Primary purpose
TREATMENT
Masking
NONE

Eligibility

Sex/Gender
ALL
Age
50 Years to 85 Years
Healthy volunteers
No

Inclusion criteria

* Male and female subjects candidates for primary cemented total knee prosthesis model Attune PS mobile plate DePuy. * Patients who possess all the psychophysical capabilities to be able to undergo the operation and all the check-ups with radiological tests included (e.g. all patients who are not willing to go to the institute for all the scheduled follow-up visits will be excluded) . * Patients who have signed the "informed consent" approved by the Ethics Committee. * Patients who are aged between 50-85.

Exclusion criteria

* Social conditions that prevent participation in the study in all its phases (homeless patients, with restrictions on personal freedom, etc.) * Patients suffering from deep venous insufficiency of the lower extremities or with a personal or family history of deep venous thrombosis or pulmonary embolism * Patients with a history of erysipelas in the lower extremities * Patients suffering from neurological or psycho-cognitive disorders * Patients suffering from post-traumatic arthrosis * Patients who have already undergone prosthetic surgery and/or arthrodesis at the level of a lower limb joint * Patients with axial knee deformities \>15° * Pregnant female patients * Patients with rheumatic diseases

Design outcomes

Primary

MeasureTime frameDescription
radiographical imagesat baseline, after 3 months, after 6 months anfer 12 monthstake stress x-rays (150 N) of the knee using TELOS to objectively and reproducibly analyze the lift-off (distance between the prosthetic component femoral and the tibial prosthetic component measured in mm)

Secondary

MeasureTime frameDescription
Hip-Knee-Anke Angleat baseline, after 3 months, after 6 months anfer 12 monthsHip-Knee-Anke Angle (HKA) on orthostatic panoramic radiographs of the pre- and post-operative lower limbs of the knee.
Visual Analogue Scaleat baseline, after 3 months, after 6 months anfer 12 monthsVisual Analogue Scale (VAS) for pain: a scale from 0 to 10 where 0 is no pain and 10 is the worst pain ever

Countries

Italy

Outcome results

None listed

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