Skip to main content
Top
Published in: BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders 1/2019

Open Access 01-12-2019 | Osteoarthrosis | Study protocol

Randomized clinical trial of medial unicompartmentel versus total knee arthroplasty for anteromedial tibio-femoral osteoarthritis. The study-protocol

Authors: Jacob Fyhring Mortensen, Lasse Enkebølle Rasmussen, Svend Erik Østgaard, Andreas Kappel, Frank Madsen, Henrik Morville Schrøder, Anders Odgaard

Published in: BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders | Issue 1/2019

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

In treatment of isolated medial unicondylar osteoarthritis of the knee, it is possible to choose between medial unicondylar knee arthroplasty (mUKA), or a total knee prosthesis (TKA). The demand for a blinded multicenter RCT with the comparison of mUKA and TKA has been increasing in recent years, to determine which prosthesis is better. Supporters of TKA suggest this treatment gives a more predictable and better result, whereas supporters of UKA suggest it is unnecessary to remove functional cartilage in other compartments. If the mUKA is worn or loosens, revision surgery will be relatively easy, whereas revision-surgery after a TKA can be more problematic.

Methods

A double-blinded multicenter Randomized Clinical Trial setup is the aim of the study. 6 hospitals throughout all 5 municipal regions of Denmark will be participating in the study. 350 patients will be included prospectively. Follow-up will be with PROM-questionnaires and clinical controls up to 20 years.

Discussion

Results will be assessed in terms of 1) PROM-questionnaires, 2) Clinical assessment of knee condition, 3) cost analysis. To avoid bias, all participants except the theatre-staff will be blinded.

PROMs

OKS, KOOS, SF36, Forgotten Joint Score, EQ5D, UCLA activity scale, Copenhagen Knee ROM scale, and Anchor questions. Publications are planned at 2, 5 and 10 years after inclusion of the last patient. The development of variables over time will be analyzed by calculating the area under the curve (AUC) for the variable relative to the initial value, and comparisons of the between-group differences will be based on parametric statistics. In this study, we feel that we have designed a study that will address these concerns with a well-designed double-blinded multicentre RCT.

Trial registration

Initial Release: 09/19/2017.
Date of enrolment of first participant: 10/11/17.
Literature
1.
go back to reference Husted H, et al. Arthrosis of the knee - diagnosis and treatment. Ugeskr Laeger. 2014;176(12). Husted H, et al. Arthrosis of the knee - diagnosis and treatment. Ugeskr Laeger. 2014;176(12).
2.
go back to reference Ahlback S. Osteoarthrosis of the knee. A radiographic investigation. Acta Radiol Diagn (Stockh). 1968;(Suppl 277):7–72. Ahlback S. Osteoarthrosis of the knee. A radiographic investigation. Acta Radiol Diagn (Stockh). 1968;(Suppl 277):7–72.
3.
go back to reference Beard D, et al. Total or partial knee arthroplasty trial - TOPKAT: study protocol for a randomised controlled trial. Trials. 2013;14:292.CrossRef Beard D, et al. Total or partial knee arthroplasty trial - TOPKAT: study protocol for a randomised controlled trial. Trials. 2013;14:292.CrossRef
4.
go back to reference Odgaard A. Dansk Knæalloplastikregister Årsrapport. 2017:2017. Odgaard A. Dansk Knæalloplastikregister Årsrapport. 2017:2017.
5.
go back to reference Chawla H, et al. Annual revision rates of partial versus total knee arthroplasty: a comparative meta-analysis. Knee. 2017;24(2):179–90.CrossRef Chawla H, et al. Annual revision rates of partial versus total knee arthroplasty: a comparative meta-analysis. Knee. 2017;24(2):179–90.CrossRef
6.
go back to reference Bottomley, N., et al., A survival analysis of 1084 knees of the Oxford unicompartmental knee arthroplasty: a comparison between consultant and trainee surgeons. Bone Joint J, 2016. 98-b (10 Supple B): p. 22–27. Bottomley, N., et al., A survival analysis of 1084 knees of the Oxford unicompartmental knee arthroplasty: a comparison between consultant and trainee surgeons. Bone Joint J, 2016. 98-b (10 Supple B): p. 22–27.
7.
go back to reference Ghomrawi HM, Eggman AA, Pearle AD. Effect of age on cost-effectiveness of unicompartmental knee arthroplasty compared with total knee arthroplasty in the U.S. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2015;97(5):396–402.CrossRef Ghomrawi HM, Eggman AA, Pearle AD. Effect of age on cost-effectiveness of unicompartmental knee arthroplasty compared with total knee arthroplasty in the U.S. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2015;97(5):396–402.CrossRef
8.
go back to reference McKeon BP, Rand JD. Treatment of osteoarthritis of the middle-aged athlete. Sports Med Arthrosc Rev. 2013;21(1):52–60.CrossRef McKeon BP, Rand JD. Treatment of osteoarthritis of the middle-aged athlete. Sports Med Arthrosc Rev. 2013;21(1):52–60.CrossRef
9.
go back to reference Richmond BI, et al. Proximal tibial bone density is preserved after unicompartmental knee arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2013;471(5):1661–9.CrossRef Richmond BI, et al. Proximal tibial bone density is preserved after unicompartmental knee arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2013;471(5):1661–9.CrossRef
10.
go back to reference Brown NM, et al. Total knee arthroplasty has higher postoperative morbidity than unicompartmental knee arthroplasty: a multicenter analysis. J Arthroplast. 2012;27(8 Suppl):86–90.CrossRef Brown NM, et al. Total knee arthroplasty has higher postoperative morbidity than unicompartmental knee arthroplasty: a multicenter analysis. J Arthroplast. 2012;27(8 Suppl):86–90.CrossRef
11.
go back to reference Liddle AD, et al. Adverse outcomes after total and unicompartmental knee replacement in 101,330 matched patients: a study of data from the National Joint Registry for England and Wales. Lancet. 2014;384(9952):1437–45.CrossRef Liddle AD, et al. Adverse outcomes after total and unicompartmental knee replacement in 101,330 matched patients: a study of data from the National Joint Registry for England and Wales. Lancet. 2014;384(9952):1437–45.CrossRef
12.
go back to reference Murray, D.W., et al., Bias and unicompartmental knee arthroplasty. Bone Joint J, 2017. 99-b (1): p. 12–15. Murray, D.W., et al., Bias and unicompartmental knee arthroplasty. Bone Joint J, 2017. 99-b (1): p. 12–15.
13.
go back to reference Kurtz S, et al. Projections of primary and revision hip and knee arthroplasty in the United States from 2005 to 2030. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2007;89(4):780–5.PubMed Kurtz S, et al. Projections of primary and revision hip and knee arthroplasty in the United States from 2005 to 2030. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2007;89(4):780–5.PubMed
14.
go back to reference Goldhahn S, et al. Complication reporting in orthopaedic trials. A systematic review of randomized controlled trials. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2009;91(8):1847–53.CrossRef Goldhahn S, et al. Complication reporting in orthopaedic trials. A systematic review of randomized controlled trials. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2009;91(8):1847–53.CrossRef
15.
go back to reference Labek G, et al. Outcome and reproducibility of data concerning the Oxford unicompartmental knee arthroplasty: a structured literature review including arthroplasty registry data. Acta Orthop. 2011;82(2):131–5.CrossRef Labek G, et al. Outcome and reproducibility of data concerning the Oxford unicompartmental knee arthroplasty: a structured literature review including arthroplasty registry data. Acta Orthop. 2011;82(2):131–5.CrossRef
16.
go back to reference Ng Man Sun S, et al. Implant use for primary hip and knee arthroplasty: are we getting it right first time? J Arthroplast. 2013;28(6):908–12.CrossRef Ng Man Sun S, et al. Implant use for primary hip and knee arthroplasty: are we getting it right first time? J Arthroplast. 2013;28(6):908–12.CrossRef
17.
go back to reference Liddle, A.D., et al., Patient-reported outcomes after total and unicompartmental knee arthroplasty: a study of 14,076 matched patients from the National Joint Registry for England and Wales. Bone Joint J, 2015. 97-b (6): p. 793–801. Liddle, A.D., et al., Patient-reported outcomes after total and unicompartmental knee arthroplasty: a study of 14,076 matched patients from the National Joint Registry for England and Wales. Bone Joint J, 2015. 97-b (6): p. 793–801.
18.
19.
go back to reference Carl Aulin NM-C, Fyhrlund J, Berg HE, Hedström M. Comparing unicompartmental to total knee arthroplasty in medial gonarthritis: study protocol for 2-year follow-up of a randomized controlled trial. Clinical Trials in Orthopedic Disorders. 2018;3(3):74–80.CrossRef Carl Aulin NM-C, Fyhrlund J, Berg HE, Hedström M. Comparing unicompartmental to total knee arthroplasty in medial gonarthritis: study protocol for 2-year follow-up of a randomized controlled trial. Clinical Trials in Orthopedic Disorders. 2018;3(3):74–80.CrossRef
20.
go back to reference Kulshrestha V, et al. Outcome of Unicondylar knee arthroplasty vs Total knee arthroplasty for early medial compartment arthritis: a randomized study. J Arthroplast. 2017;32(5):1460–9.CrossRef Kulshrestha V, et al. Outcome of Unicondylar knee arthroplasty vs Total knee arthroplasty for early medial compartment arthritis: a randomized study. J Arthroplast. 2017;32(5):1460–9.CrossRef
21.
go back to reference Schulz KF, Altman DG, Moher D. CONSORT 2010 statement: updated guidelines for reporting parallel group randomised trials. BMJ. 2010;340. Schulz KF, Altman DG, Moher D. CONSORT 2010 statement: updated guidelines for reporting parallel group randomised trials. BMJ. 2010;340.
22.
go back to reference Chan A, et al. Spirit 2013 statement: defining standard protocol items for clinical trials. Ann Intern Med. 2013;158(3):200–7.CrossRef Chan A, et al. Spirit 2013 statement: defining standard protocol items for clinical trials. Ann Intern Med. 2013;158(3):200–7.CrossRef
23.
go back to reference Gamble C, et al. Guidelines for the content of statistical analysis plans in clinical trials. Jama. 2017;318(23):2337–43.CrossRef Gamble C, et al. Guidelines for the content of statistical analysis plans in clinical trials. Jama. 2017;318(23):2337–43.CrossRef
24.
go back to reference Dawson J, et al. Questionnaire on the perceptions of patients about total knee replacement. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 1998;80(1):63–9.CrossRef Dawson J, et al. Questionnaire on the perceptions of patients about total knee replacement. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 1998;80(1):63–9.CrossRef
25.
go back to reference Harcourt WG, White SH, Jones P. Specificity of the Oxford knee status questionnaire. The effect of disease of the hip or lumbar spine on patients' perception of knee disability. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2001;83(3):345–7.CrossRef Harcourt WG, White SH, Jones P. Specificity of the Oxford knee status questionnaire. The effect of disease of the hip or lumbar spine on patients' perception of knee disability. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2001;83(3):345–7.CrossRef
26.
go back to reference Whitehouse SL, et al. The Oxford knee score; problems and pitfalls. Knee. 2005;12(4):287–91.CrossRef Whitehouse SL, et al. The Oxford knee score; problems and pitfalls. Knee. 2005;12(4):287–91.CrossRef
27.
go back to reference Charoencholvanich K, Pongcharoen B. Oxford knee score and SF-36: translation & reliability for use with total knee arthroscopy patients in Thailand. J Med Assoc Thail. 2005;88(9):1194–202. Charoencholvanich K, Pongcharoen B. Oxford knee score and SF-36: translation & reliability for use with total knee arthroscopy patients in Thailand. J Med Assoc Thail. 2005;88(9):1194–202.
28.
go back to reference RAND, SF-36, 36-item short form survey. feb. 2918. RAND, SF-36, 36-item short form survey. feb. 2918.
29.
30.
go back to reference Loth FL, et al. What makes patients aware of their artificial knee joint? BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2018;19(1):5.CrossRef Loth FL, et al. What makes patients aware of their artificial knee joint? BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2018;19(1):5.CrossRef
31.
go back to reference website, F.J.S., Forgotten Joint Score, knee. Feb. 2018. website, F.J.S., Forgotten Joint Score, knee. Feb. 2018.
32.
go back to reference Roos EM, Toksvig-Larsen S. Knee injury and osteoarthritis outcome score (KOOS) - validation and comparison to the WOMAC in total knee replacement. Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2003;1:17.CrossRef Roos EM, Toksvig-Larsen S. Knee injury and osteoarthritis outcome score (KOOS) - validation and comparison to the WOMAC in total knee replacement. Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2003;1:17.CrossRef
33.
go back to reference Roos EM, et al. Knee injury and osteoarthritis outcome score (KOOS)--development of a self-administered outcome measure. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther. 1998;28(2):88–96.CrossRef Roos EM, et al. Knee injury and osteoarthritis outcome score (KOOS)--development of a self-administered outcome measure. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther. 1998;28(2):88–96.CrossRef
34.
go back to reference Zahiri CA, et al. Assessing activity in joint replacement patients. J Arthroplast. 1998;13(8):890–5.CrossRef Zahiri CA, et al. Assessing activity in joint replacement patients. J Arthroplast. 1998;13(8):890–5.CrossRef
35.
go back to reference Anne Mørup-Petersen, S.T.S., Christina E. Holm, Pætur M. Holm Tobias W. Klausen, Michael R. Krogsgaard Mogens B Laursen, Anders Odgaard. , UCLA Activity Scale: translation process and validation study in a Danish knee osteoarthritis population. Draft, feb. 2018. Anne Mørup-Petersen, S.T.S., Christina E. Holm, Pætur M. Holm Tobias W. Klausen, Michael R. Krogsgaard Mogens B Laursen, Anders Odgaard. , UCLA Activity Scale: translation process and validation study in a Danish knee osteoarthritis population. Draft, feb. 2018.
36.
go back to reference Anne Mørup-Petersen, P.M.H., Christina E. Holm Tobias W. Klausen, Søren T. Skou, Michael R. Krogsgaard Mogens B Laursen, Anders Odgaard., Knee osteoarthritis patients can provide useful estimates of passive knee range of motion: development and validation of the Copenhagen Knee ROM Scale. Submitted Feb. 2018. Anne Mørup-Petersen, P.M.H., Christina E. Holm Tobias W. Klausen, Søren T. Skou, Michael R. Krogsgaard Mogens B Laursen, Anders Odgaard., Knee osteoarthritis patients can provide useful estimates of passive knee range of motion: development and validation of the Copenhagen Knee ROM Scale. Submitted Feb. 2018.
37.
go back to reference Odgaard A, et al. The mark Coventry award: patellofemoral arthroplasty results in better range of movement and early patient-reported outcomes than TKA. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2018;476(1):87–100.CrossRef Odgaard A, et al. The mark Coventry award: patellofemoral arthroplasty results in better range of movement and early patient-reported outcomes than TKA. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2018;476(1):87–100.CrossRef
38.
go back to reference Brinker MR, Lund PJ, Barrack RL. Demographic biases of scoring instruments for the results of total knee arthroplasty. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1997;79(6):858–65.CrossRef Brinker MR, Lund PJ, Barrack RL. Demographic biases of scoring instruments for the results of total knee arthroplasty. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1997;79(6):858–65.CrossRef
39.
go back to reference Jakobsen TL, et al. Reliability of knee joint range of motion and circumference measurements after total knee arthroplasty: does tester experience matter? Physiother Res Int. 2010;15(3):126–34.CrossRef Jakobsen TL, et al. Reliability of knee joint range of motion and circumference measurements after total knee arthroplasty: does tester experience matter? Physiother Res Int. 2010;15(3):126–34.CrossRef
41.
go back to reference Pedersen KM. Sundhedsøkonomi: Munksgaard; 2003. Pedersen KM. Sundhedsøkonomi: Munksgaard; 2003.
42.
go back to reference Glick H. D.S., Economic Evaluation in. Clinical Trials. 2007. Glick H. D.S., Economic Evaluation in. Clinical Trials. 2007.
43.
go back to reference Sterne, K.a., Essential Medical Statistics. 2003. Sterne, K.a., Essential Medical Statistics. 2003.
Metadata
Title
Randomized clinical trial of medial unicompartmentel versus total knee arthroplasty for anteromedial tibio-femoral osteoarthritis. The study-protocol
Authors
Jacob Fyhring Mortensen
Lasse Enkebølle Rasmussen
Svend Erik Østgaard
Andreas Kappel
Frank Madsen
Henrik Morville Schrøder
Anders Odgaard
Publication date
01-12-2019
Publisher
BioMed Central
Published in
BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders / Issue 1/2019
Electronic ISSN: 1471-2474
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s12891-019-2508-1

Other articles of this Issue 1/2019

BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders 1/2019 Go to the issue