CClinicalTrials.gg
CompletedNCT06124651Updated Nov 9, 2023

Comparison of Cruciate Retaining and Posterior Stabilized Total Knee Arthroplasty

An interventional study of Total knee replacement with cruciate retaining femoral component and Total knee replacement with cruciate substituting femoral component in Osteoarthritis, Knee and Arthropathy of Knee Joint, sponsored by Ewha Womans University. Completed. Open to participants aged 25 Years to 99 Years. Per ClinicalTrials.gov, last updated 2023-11-09.

Sponsored by Ewha Womans University · Not applicable, Interventional, and Treatment

From the registry’s dates

  • Registered 19 years 7 months after the study started (first participant enrolled Jan 2004, registered Aug 2023).
Phase
Not applicable
Study type
Interventional
Enrollment
300
Allocation
Randomized
Ages
25 Years to 99 Years
Sex
All
01

Study summary

Several authors and large registries have suggested the potential for an increased risk of all-cause revision with the use of posterior cruciate-substitution (PS) total knee arthroplasty (TKA). The purpose of the current study was to compare posterior cruciate retaining (CR) and PS implants with respect to the functional and radiographic results, prevalence of osteolysis, revision rates and survivorship.

Read the detailed description

The supremacy debate between posterior cruciate-retaining (CR) and posterior stabilized (PS) total knee arthroplasty (TKA) has now entered into the 4th decade. Multiple research studies have investigated CR and PS TKAs on the basis of kinematic, clinical, radiographic, and survivorship analysis. Despite arguments in favor of CR or PS TKA designs, several short or mid-term studies have shown no difference in functional outcomes between these two designs. Considering the fact that CR and PS TKA fare equally at short-term and mid-term, the decision to select either design should depend on their long-term survivorship. There have been few long-term survivorship analysis that have directly compared CR and PS TKAs with aseptic revision for any reason as the end point.

These long-term studies of CR and PS TKA have been done independently. A comparison of the results in the same patients eliminates the variability that is introduced by differences in gender, age, weight, comorbidity, bone quality, and activity level and allows for a meaningful comparison of the impact of fixation on the outcome of TKA. However, variability in terms of the preoperative severity of arthritis cannot be eliminated because of the design on both sides is rarely identical.

The purpose of this study was to identify differences in implant survivorship between CR and PS TKAs in patients with osteoarthritis who were younger than 65 years of age and CR implant in one knee and PS implant in the other.

02

Conditions studied

  • Osteoarthritis, Knee
  • Arthropathy of Knee Joint
03

In context

Osteoarthritis, Knee

3,302 studies on the registry are indexed under Osteoarthritis, Knee; 608 are open to participants now.

This study's enrollment of 300 is above the median of 70 across 2,731 interventional studies indexed under Osteoarthritis, Knee.

Browse Osteoarthritis, Knee studies →

Lead sponsor

Ewha Womans University is the lead sponsor of 40 studies on the registry; none are open to participants now.

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

04

Who can participate

Ages eligible
25 Years to 99 Years
Sexes eligible
All
Accepts healthy volunteers
No

Inclusion criteria

  • End-stage osteoarthritis of the knee joint requiring total knee arthroplasty with bilateral disease

Exclusion criteria

Exclusion Criteria:

  • Inflammatory disease
  • patient with other Lower extremity disease which may affect functional outcome
  • Neurologic disease effecting patients lower extremity
  • Revision surgery
  • Patient not medically cleared for bilateral surgery
05

Study design

Phase
Not applicable
Primary purpose
Treatment
Allocation
Randomized
Masking
Double (Participant, Outcomes assessor)
Enrollment
300 participants (actual)

Study arms

  • Active comparator
    CR knee

    This type of total knee arthroplasty retains the posterior cruciate ligament.

    Procedure: Total knee replacement with cruciate retaining femoral component

  • Active comparator
    PS knee

    This type of total knee sacrifices the posterior cruciate ligament and cam and post mechanism replaces its function.

    Procedure: Total knee replacement with cruciate substituting femoral component

Interventions

  • ProcedureTotal knee replacement with cruciate retaining femoral component

    To perform the total knee replacement, the knee joint is anatomically dissected, and thin portions of bone and cartilage is resected to accommodate a metallic implants. Implants are fixed to patients' bone with bone cements. Many designs for femoral component designs are available. In the present study, two types of implants, one CR(cruciate retaining), where the posterior cruciate ligaments are retained, and one PS(Posterior cruciate substituting), where the posterior cruciate ligaments are resected, will be compared. To make the comparison more reliable, the same kind of implants will be used, so that the major portions of femoral component design remains the same and the tibial component remains the same. Only the cruciate ligament parts are different. For this arm of intervention, CR knee will be used, so posterior cruciate will remain intact after the surgery and still function to aid in the knee stability.

  • ProcedureTotal knee replacement with cruciate substituting femoral component

    To perform the total knee replacement, the knee joint is anatomically dissected, and thin portions of bone and cartilage is resected to accommodate metallic implants that has similar contours of a native knee. Implants are fixed to patients' bone with bone cements. This procedure will use the femoral component that sacrifice the posterior cruciate ligament and having a box area with a post, so that "cam-post" mechanism of implants can mimic the function of the posterior cruciate ligament. To make the comparison more reliable, the same kind of implants will be used, so that the major portions of femoral component remains the same. The tibial component will remain the same design. Therefore, only the cruciate ligament parts will be different.

06

What researchers measure

Primary outcomes

  1. Improvement in Knee Society Knee Score

    change in knee score will be compared with initial score, until mean follow up of 25 years. The score ranges from 0 to 100, and the 100 is the highest.

    Time frame: Initial(one day before surgery), at 3 months after the surgery, 1 year after the surgery, and then average 1 year after until the study completion

Secondary outcomes

  1. Improvement in the Range of motion

    change in the range of motion of knee joint will be compared with the initial value, until mean follow up of 25 years.The range of motion for knee typically are around 0 degrees to 130 degrees, and more range is considered as a better outcome.

    Time frame: Initial(one day before surgery), and at 3 months after the surgery, 1 year after the surgery, and then average 1year after surgery until the study completion.

07

Study locations

No study locations are listed for this record.

08

Updates

Tracking since Sep 25, 2026
No changes since tracking began. The registry record was last updated on Nov 9, 2023, before this site started recording changes on Sep 25, 2026. Its history is on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗
09

Registry details

Key details

Study ID
NCT06124651
Lead sponsor
Ewha Womans University
Responsible party
Young Hoo Kim (Professor, Ewha Womans University) — Principal investigator
First posted
Nov 9, 2023
Start date
Jan 1, 2004
Primary completion
Jun 30, 2006
Completion
May 16, 2023
Last update
Nov 9, 2023

Study contacts

Young Hoo Kim, MD
principal investigator · Professor

Oversight

FDA-regulated drug
No
FDA-regulated device
No
View the source record on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗

Not currently enrolling

This study is completed, as verified in Nov 2023. 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