CClinicalTrials.gg
WithdrawnNCT00175162Updated Dec 19, 2022

A Comparison of Fixation Method in Total Knee Arthroplasty - Low Viscosity Versus High Viscosity Bone Cement

An interventional study of Osteopal G vs. Refobacin-Palacos R bone cement in Osteoarthritis, sponsored by University of Aarhus. Withdrawn at 1 site in Denmark. Open to participants aged 70 Years and older. Per ClinicalTrials.gov, last updated 2022-12-19.

Sponsored by University of Aarhus · Not applicable, Interventional, and Treatment

Why this study was withdrawn
No financing possible
Phase
Not applicable
Study type
Interventional
Enrollment
0
Allocation
Randomized
Ages
70 Years and older
Sex
All
01

Study summary

The purpose of this study is to compare the early migration and periprosthetic bone changes of two total knee arthroplasties fixated with two different type bone cement.

Read the detailed description

Around 4% of total knee arthroplasties (TKA) are revised 15 years after the primary operation, most due to loosening of the implant. About 70 % TKA are fixed with bone cement and in general the results after total knee arthroplasty are excellent and with the existing technique about 95% well functioning prostheses can be expected 10 years post surgery. The most serious late complication to surgery is aseptic loosening of the implants; and this remains one of the main courses of failure of both uncemented and cemented total knee implants.

Implant design, method of fixation, the quality of bone cement, surgerytechnique and the bone mass density are some of the factors that have a large influence on implant stability. Fixation of the tibia baseplates in total knee arthroplasty can be obtained by different type bone cement.

In this project we are using a modular tibia component with a central wedge-shaped stem. Upon randomization at surgery the implant is consolidated in the bone with either low-viscosity or high-viscosity bone cement.

The purpose of this study is to compare the early migration of a total knee implant fixated with two different bone cements using RSA (radio stereophotogrammetric analysis) for evaluation. Furthermore, we will make research into the periprosthetic bone and its changes post surgery using DEXA. Finally, the extend of the expected micromovements between the polyethylen liner and the metal backing of the titanium plateau will be compared and taken into account with the results.

Several factors can influence the long-term survival of cemented TKA. Bone-sclerosing at the tibia condyles may induce a problem with cement penetration into the cancellous bone. Furthermore, blood-contamination in the cancellous bone may reduce the shear-strength at the bone-cement site by 50%. A solid cement-implant interface limits the amount of debris in the interface bringing down the risk of radiolucent lines and osteolysis. The tibial implant used in this study is designed with a rim under the plateau to support the cement layer on the tibial condyles at the time of fixation. The implant has a stem making it more resistant to shearing forces. In this study we primarily consider the bone cement viscosity on the outcome. Both types are used in hip-arthroplasties with good results.

To evaluate both the implant-bone micromotions and the polyethylen-implant micromovements metal markers have been placed on the tibial implants pre-operatively. They will also be inserted into the tibial bone and into the tibial polyethylen intra-operatively allowing us to evaluate stereo x-rays by a photogrammetric computer analyses called RSA at the Orthopaedic Center, Aarhus University Hospital. Follow-up stereo x-rays will be scheduled for 1 week, 3 months, 6 month, 1 years and 2 years post-surgery. Periprostetic bone density will be evaluated at 1 week, 1 year and 2 years upon inclusion at the Orthopaedic Center, Aarhus University Hospital.

02

Conditions studied

  • Osteoarthritis

Browse trials for

Keywords

  • RSA
  • DEXA
  • Genoarthrosis
  • Knee Arthroplasty
  • Micromotion of polyethylene liner
  • Cement
03

In context

Osteoarthritis

4,398 studies on the registry are indexed under Osteoarthritis; 582 are open to participants now.

Browse Osteoarthritis studies →

Lead sponsor

University of Aarhus is the lead sponsor of 1,274 studies on the registry; 183 are open to participants now.

Counted across the registry records on this site, refreshed daily.

04

Who can participate

Ages eligible
70 Years and older
Sexes eligible
All
Accepts healthy volunteers
No

Inclusion criteria

  • Patients with one- or double-sided primary knee arthrosis.
  • Patients with a sufficient bone quality for implantation of knee prosthesis.
  • Informed and written patient consent.

Exclusion criteria

Exclusion Criteria:

  • Patients with neuromuscular or vascular diseases in the affected leg.
  • Patients who peroperatively are estimated unsuitable for knee arthroplasty e.g. due to bone cysts or dilution of the bone mass.
  • Patients who use non-steroid anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAID) and cannot refrain from taking them postoperatively (this includes COX-2-inhibitors).
  • Patients with osteoporosis estimated from the preoperative x-ray or former diagnosis of osteoporo-sis.
  • Patients with knee arthrosis following fracture sequelae.
  • Women, who are pregnant or are at risk of getting pregnant throughout the 2 year follow-up.
05

Study design

Phase
Not applicable
Primary purpose
Treatment
Allocation
Randomized
Intervention model
Parallel assignment
Masking
Single (Participant)
Enrollment
0 participants (actual)

Study arms

  • Active comparator
    Osteopal G bone cement

    Device: Osteopal G vs. Refobacin-Palacos R bone cement

  • Active comparator
    Refobacin-Palacos R bone cement

    Device: Osteopal G vs. Refobacin-Palacos R bone cement

Interventions

  • DeviceOsteopal G vs. Refobacin-Palacos R bone cement

    Bone cement

    Also known as: Osteopal G bone cement, refobacin-palacos R bone cement

06

What researchers measure

Primary outcomes

  1. Tibial prosthesis part migration evaluated by RSA.

    Time frame: 2011

Secondary outcomes

  1. Micromotion of the modular polyethylen liner in both type prostheses evaluated by RSA estimating the role of wear.

    Time frame: 2011

07

Study locations

1 site
  • Orthopaedic Center, Aarhus University Hospital
    Aarhus, 8200, Denmark
08

Updates

Tracking since Sep 25, 2026
No changes since tracking began. The registry record was last updated on Dec 19, 2022, before this site started recording changes on Sep 25, 2026. Its history is on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗
09

Registry details

Key details

Study ID
NCT00175162
Lead sponsor
University of Aarhus
Collaborators
Aarhus University Hospital, Zimmer Biomet
Responsible party
Sponsor
First posted
Sep 15, 2005
Completion
Dec 2010
Last update
Dec 19, 2022

Study contacts

Kjeld Søballe, MD, Prof.
principal investigator · Orthopaedic Center, Aarhus University Hospital, Tage-Hansens Gade 2, 8000 Aarhus C, Denmark.

Oversight

Data monitoring committee
No
View the source record on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗

Not currently enrolling

This study is withdrawn, as verified in Oct 2010. You cannot join it, but the record below documents what was studied.

Follow this study

Get an email when the registry record changes — status, dates, results — or when someone posts here.

Sign in to follow

Discussion

Questions and observations about this study, from anyone following it. Not medical advice, and not a channel to the study team — their contact details are on the registry record.

Sign in to join the discussion. Reading takes no account; posting does. You choose a display name, and a pseudonym is the default.

Nothing here yet. If you are running this trial, taking part in it, or weighing whether to, this is the place to say so.

Start the discussion