Ignite Creation Date:
2025-12-24 @ 9:42 PM
Ignite Modification Date:
2026-01-05 @ 6:38 PM
Study NCT ID:
NCT02798432
Status:
ACTIVE_NOT_RECRUITING
Last Update Posted:
2018-08-02
First Post:
2016-04-20
Is NOT Gene Therapy:
True
Has Adverse Events:
False
Brief Title:
Hybrid Versus Cemented TKA Using the NexGen LPS Prosthesis
Sponsor:
Jesus Moreta Suarez
Organization:
Study Overview
Official Title:
Comparing Hybrid and Cemented TKA Using the NexGen LPS Prosthesis
Status:
ACTIVE_NOT_RECRUITING
Status Verified Date:
2018-07
Last Known Status:
None
Delayed Posting:
No
If Stopped, Why?:
Not Stopped
Has Expanded Access:
False
If Expanded Access, NCT#:
N/A
Has Expanded Access, NCT# Status:
N/A
Acronym:
None
Brief Summary:
Early total knee arthroplasty (TKA) implant systems most frequently used an all-polyethylene cemented tibial component1. Based on finite-element analysis studies reporting superior force distribution compared with conventional all-polyethylene components, metal-backed tibial baseplates have dominated the TKA implant market since the middle of the 1980's2. These modular implants provided excellent long-term implant survivorship3.
As TKA became increasingly successful, younger patients increasingly became eligible. Increasing life expectancy has raised the concern that cemented TKAs may not withstand prolonged use, particularly in younger patients4. Patients younger than 65 years are projected to account for more than 50% of patients undergoing TKA by 2016 and to more than 50% of patients undergoing revision surgery by 2011. The number of total knee revisions in the United States is expected to increase from 38,300 in 2005 to 268,200 in 20305.
Many authors have reported excellent and equivalent results of cemented and cementless TKA6-8. Despite these encouraging reports, the major concern with cementless TKA has been the tibial component, and, therefore, the preference for many surgeons still remains to cement the tibial component9,10. The femoral component may be the most suitable for cementless fixation11-13. However, the best femoral method of fixation is still being discussed. Currently, the decision to cement or not to cement the femoral component is based on the surgeon's preference14.
The current study was designed to compare the hybrid NexGen LPS (Zimmer Inc, Warsaw, IN) and the cemented NexGen LPS. The purpose of this study is to establish whether the hybrid NexGen LPS leads to equally successful results as the cemented TKA gold standard
As TKA became increasingly successful, younger patients increasingly became eligible. Increasing life expectancy has raised the concern that cemented TKAs may not withstand prolonged use, particularly in younger patients4. Patients younger than 65 years are projected to account for more than 50% of patients undergoing TKA by 2016 and to more than 50% of patients undergoing revision surgery by 2011. The number of total knee revisions in the United States is expected to increase from 38,300 in 2005 to 268,200 in 20305.
Many authors have reported excellent and equivalent results of cemented and cementless TKA6-8. Despite these encouraging reports, the major concern with cementless TKA has been the tibial component, and, therefore, the preference for many surgeons still remains to cement the tibial component9,10. The femoral component may be the most suitable for cementless fixation11-13. However, the best femoral method of fixation is still being discussed. Currently, the decision to cement or not to cement the femoral component is based on the surgeon's preference14.
The current study was designed to compare the hybrid NexGen LPS (Zimmer Inc, Warsaw, IN) and the cemented NexGen LPS. The purpose of this study is to establish whether the hybrid NexGen LPS leads to equally successful results as the cemented TKA gold standard
Detailed Description:
None
Study Oversight
Has Oversight DMC:
True
Is a FDA Regulated Drug?:
None
Is a FDA Regulated Device?:
None
Is an Unapproved Device?:
None
Is a PPSD?:
None
Is a US Export?:
None
Is an FDA AA801 Violation?: