Skip to content

Flexible versus standard intramedullary rod in Triathlon primary total knee replacement: effects on sagittal contour of the distal femur, implant positioning, functional outcome and sizing

Flexible versus standard intramedullary rod in Triathlon primary total knee replacement: effects on sagittal contour of the distal femur, implant positioning, functional outcome and sizing - FLIRT_1

Status
Active, not recruiting
Phases
Unknown
Study type
Observational
Source
NL-OMON
Registry ID
NL-OMON40562
Enrollment
60
Registered
2014-10-23
Start date
2015-09-24
Completion date
Unknown
Last updated
2024-06-11

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

Conditions

joint wear osteoarthrits

Interventions

None listed

Sponsors

Stryker Europe
Lead Sponsor

Eligibility

Age
18 Years to 99 Years

Inclusion criteria

Inclusion criteria: * Patient with non-inflammatory knee osteoarthritis which is radiologically confirmed and which requires total knee replacement * Age between 40 and 75 years, inclusive * Patient plans to be available for follow-up until two years post-operative * Patient is in stable health and is free of or treated for cardiac, pulmonary, haematological, or other conditions that would pose excessive operative risk * Patient has

Exclusion criteria

Exclusion criteria: * Patient has a BMI > 35 * Patient's expected physical activity after surgery is 2 or less on the UCLA Activity Scale * Patient has had previous hip or knee replacement surgery in the last 6 months, or is planned to have a (second) hip or knee replacement in the next 6-12 months (because of the effect on function) * Patient has had a previous hip replacement on the affected side (this may cause for a restriction for the rod placement during surgery) * Patient has had major, non-arthroscopic surgery to the study knee, including HTO. * Patient has an active, local infection or systemic infection * Patient has physical, emotional or neurological conditions that would compromise compliance with post-operative rehabilitation and follow-up * Bone stock compromised by disease, infection or prior implantation which cannot provide adequate support and/or fixation to the prosthesis * Severe instability of the knee joint secondary to the absence of collateral ligament integrity and function. i.e. due to loss of cartilage reported as *substantie verlies* * Patient has knee flexion 10 degrees (passive extension lag) * Patient has > 30 degrees extension deficit (active restraint to extension) * Patient does not have a proper functioning patella tendon on the affected side; measured as inability of active extension of the knee * Patient has quadriceps weakness on the affected side; score on MRC scale

Design outcomes

Primary

MeasureTime frame
The contour of the distal femur is quantified in (first): the flexion angle of the TKA in the sagittal plane. This angle is defined as the angle * between the bone stub axis of the femur and the neutral line of the femoral component of the prosthesis (see p14 protocol)

Secondary

MeasureTime frame
* The contour of the distal femur is further quantified in: The sagittal profile. The anterior sagittal profile is calculated as the mean length of three lines connecting trochlear axis of the distal femur in the sagittal plane and the outer anterior border of the femur/prosthesis (see protocol p15). * Functional outcome measured with: - Get up and Go test (GUG) - Stair climbing test as measure of ability to ascend, descend a flight of stairs. - Knee power output measured with the Leg Extensor Power Rig (see protocol p17) * Patient reported function scores: - Oxford Knee Score - KOOS-PS - KUJALA score * Clinician reported function scores: - Knee society score

Countries

Netherlands

Outcome results

None listed

Source: NL-OMON (via WHO ICTRP)