OsteoarthritisNCT01373112
Articulating Versus Static Antibiotic Loaded Spacers for the Treatment of Prosthetic Knee Infection
A study testing Static Spacer and Articulating Spacer in people with Osteoarthritis and Knee Infection, run by Rush University Medical Center at 1 site in United States.
Trial summary
Infection remains a difficult-to-treat complication of total knee arthroplasty. The gold standard treatment is two-stage removal of the prosthesis with later replacement of permanent implants. Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages 18 to 100 years
- Conditions the study is for
- Osteoarthritis, Knee Infection, Prosthetic Joint Infection
- What is being tested?
- Static Spacer and Articulating Spacer
- Type of treatment
- Surgery or procedure
- Could I receive a placebo?
- No, everyone receives an active treatment
- How many people
- 68 participants
- Where
- 1 siteUnited States
- Study dates
- Dec 2011to Aug 2020
- Phase
- Interventional
- Are there results?
- None posted in the registry
Key requirements
Who can take part, as listed by the sponsor. Only the study team can confirm whether you are eligible, so take this list to your doctor.
- Ages 18 to 100 years
- All sexes
- No healthy volunteers
- Adult, Older adult
Who may be able to join
- 1) Diagnosis of a periprosthetic joint infection of a primary total knee arthroplasty with a planned two-stage exchange procedure.
Who cannot join
- Infection of a revision as opposed to a primary total knee arthroplasty
- Medically unfit for operative intervention
- Extensive bone loss preventing the use of an articulating spacer
- Soft tissue defects that prevent the use of an articulating spacer
- Known allergy to polymethylmethacrylate, tobramycin or vancomycin.
Trial locations and contacts
1 site in 1 country.
United States1 site
Rush University Medical Center
Chicago, Illinois, 60612
About this study
Infection remains a difficult-to-treat complication of total knee arthroplasty. The gold standard treatment is two-stage removal of the prosthesis with later replacement of permanent implants. The first stage consists of removal of the infected arthroplasty components and the surrounding devitalized tissue, copious pulsed irrigation, and placement of a temporary antibiotic-impregnated cement spacer. This spacer typically is left in place six weeks, during which time the patient receives intravenous antibiotics. After the surgeon feels that the infection has been eradicated, or if the patient requires repeat debridement, a second operative procedure is performed. While the use of an antibiotic-loaded spacer is well accepted, whether the spacer should immobilize the knee (a so-called "static" spacer) or allow for range of motion (a so-called "articulating" spacer) is controversial. Proponents of articulating spacers argue that they prevent scarring of the musculature surrounding the knee resulting in easier reimplantation, improved long-term knee function, and improved range of motion. Proponents of static spacers argue that immobilization of the periarticular soft tissues aids in clearance of the infection and is simpler to fashion intraoperatively. While good results have been described with both methods, comparative trials have been conflicting as to whether spacer design alters knee function, operative time, and range of motion. Equipoise exists within the literature, and no randomized clinical trial has been conducted to evaluate this issue.
The purpose of this study is to compare articulating and static antibiotic-impregnated spacers for the treatment of chronic periprosthetic infection complicating total knee arthroplasty through a prospective, randomized clinical trial. The goals of this trial are to determine the effect of spacer design upon eradication of infection, knee function, ease of reimplantation, and range of motion. The investigators hypothesize that articulating spacers will provide shorter operative times at reimplantation, while improving knee function and range of motion.
Read the detailed description
After diagnosis of infection and informed consent, patients will be taken to the operating room. After anesthetization, patients will be randomized to either an articulating spacer or a static spacer. Randomization will be performed by prepared opaque envelopes administered by a nonparticipant in the study. After a complete debridement of devitalized tissue, explantation of the infected components and any associated cement, either an articulating or static spacer will be placed. All spacers will be formed of 3 g of Vancomycin and 1 g of Tobramycin for each 40 g packet of cement. Articulating spacers will be formed of antibiotic impregnated cement using the Stage One system (Biomet, Warsaw, IN). Static spacers will be hand-made to fit the femoral and tibial exposed metaphyses as a solid block with associated antibiotic cement coated tibial and femoral intramedullary rod, such that knee motion will be minimized.
Post-operatively, all patients will be made touch-down weight bearing protected with a walker or crutches. If a static spacer is placed, patients will be immobilized using with a knee immobilizer. If an articulating spacer is utilized, range of motion will be allowed to the limits of stability as determined in the operating room and protected with a hinged knee brace. At the time of reoperation, the joint will be aspirated and multiple cultures obtained along with intraoperative histopathological analysis to evaluate for persistent infection.
Data collected preoperatively will include age, gender, laterality, etiology of knee degeneration, comorbidities, Knee Society score, and infecting organisms. The Knee Society score has been used extensively in the study of revision knee arthroplasty and has been found to be reliable and valid and will be determined pre-operatively and at all follow-up visits.
Data collected at the time of implant removal and reimplantation will include operative time, blood loss, and need for an extensile exposure. Radiographs performed immediately following and just prior to reimplantation will be reviewed to determine if the spacer utilized has caused bone loss; bone loss to the cut bony surfaces will be confirmed intraoperatively. At each follow-up visit radiographic appearance, the Knee Society Score, knee range of motion, recurrence of infection, and the need for revision or reoperation of any kind on the knee will be determined.
All portions of this study will be part of conventional care except for randomization to either a static or articulating spacer. Which type of spacer is used currently depends upon the judgment of the attending surgeons and both are used routinely.
The primary outcome variable will be range of motion. A power analysis was conducted with the assistance of Dr. Mario Moric at Rush using range of motion as our primary outcome variable, with standard deviations culled from two of the largest series to date -Van Thiel and colleagues (2010) and Fehring and colleagues (2000). For an 80% chance of detecting a predetermined clinically significant difference of 10 degrees, 53 patients per group, 106 patients total, will be needed. To account for attrition, our target sample size will be 140 patients.
- Conditions
- Osteoarthritis, Knee Infection, Prosthetic Joint Infection, Complications; Arthroplasty, Infection or Inflammation, Complications; Arthroplasty
- Being tested
- Static Spacer, Articulating Spacer
- Keywords
- arthroplasty, knee replacement, Osteoarthritis, knee Infection, Prosthetic Joint Infection, Complications; Arthroplasty, Infection or Inflammation, Complications; Arthroplasty
- Medical subject headings
- Osteoarthritis, Infections, Inflammation
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
Static SpacerProcedure or surgery
After diagnosis of infection and informed consent, patients will be taken to the operating room. After anesthetization, patients will be randomized to either an articulating spacer or a static spacer. Randomization will be performed by prepared opaque envelopes administered by a nonparticipant in the study. After a complete debridement of devitalized tissue, explantation of the infected components and any associated cement, either an articulating or static spacer will be placed. All spacers will be formed of 3 g of Vancomycin and 1 g of Tobramycin for each 40 g packet of cement. Static spacers will be hand-made to fit the femoral and tibial exposed metaphyses as a solid block with associated antibiotic cement coated tibial and femoral intramedullary rod, such that knee motion will be minimized.
Articulating SpacerProcedure or surgery
After diagnosis of infection and informed consent, patients will be taken to the operating room. After anesthetization, patients will be randomized to either an articulating spacer or a static spacer. Randomization will be performed by prepared opaque envelopes administered by a nonparticipant in the study. After a complete debridement of devitalized tissue, explantation of the infected components and any associated cement, either an articulating or static spacer will be placed. All spacers will be formed of 3 g of Vancomycin and 1 g of Tobramycin for each 40 g packet of cement. Articulating spacers will be formed of antibiotic impregnated cement using the Stage One system (Biomet, Warsaw, IN).
| Study group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| Static Spacer | Experimental | After diagnosis of infection and informed consent, patients will be taken to the operating room. After anesthetization, patients will be randomized to either an articulating spacer or a static spacer. Randomization will be performed by prepared opaque envelopes administered by a nonparticipant in the study. After a complete debridement of devitalized tissue, explantation of the infected components and any associated cement, either an articulating or static spacer will be placed. All spacers will be formed of 3 g of Vancomycin and 1 g of Tobramycin for each 40 g packet of cement. Static spacers will be hand-made to fit the femoral and tibial exposed metaphyses as a solid block with associated antibiotic cement coated tibial and femoral intramedullary rod, such that knee motion will be minimized. Receives: Procedure: Static Spacer |
| Articulating Spacer | Experimental | After diagnosis of infection and informed consent, patients will be taken to the operating room. After anesthetization, patients will be randomized to either an articulating spacer or a static spacer. Randomization will be performed by prepared opaque envelopes administered by a nonparticipant in the study. After a complete debridement of devitalized tissue, explantation of the infected components and any associated cement, either an articulating or static spacer will be placed. All spacers will be formed of 3 g of Vancomycin and 1 g of Tobramycin for each 40 g packet of cement. Articulating spacers will be formed of antibiotic impregnated cement using the Stage One system (Biomet, Warsaw, IN). Receives: Procedure: Articulating Spacer |
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
Range of motion
Measured: Outcomes will be collected until 2 years post-operatively.
Secondary outcomes (2)
Knee Society Score
Measured: Outcomes will be collected until 2 years post-operatively.
Operative time
Measured: Outcomes will be collected until 2 years post-operatively.
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted14 Jun 2011 (estimated)
- Study startDec 2011
- Primary completionAug 2020
- Study completionAug 2020
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Publications (21)Papers the sponsor has linked to this study.
- Other trials for OsteoarthritisStudies of the same condition, open and under way.
- More trials run by Rush University Medical CenterThe sponsor's other registered studies.
- What the trial phases meanHow a treatment moves from first tests in people to approval.
More details
For doctors and researchers: how the study is designed, who runs it, and its registry IDs.
Study design
- Study type
- Interventional
- Phase
- Phase N/A
- Primary purpose
- Treatment
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- None (open label)
- Enrolment
- 68 participants (actual)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- Rush University Medical Center
- Sponsor type
- University, hospital or other
- Collaborators
- Central DuPage Hospital, Joint Implant Surgeons, Inc., Thomas Jefferson University
- Responsible party
- Principal investigator, Peter N. Chalmers, MD, Rush University Medical Center
- Investigators
- Peter Chalmers, MD, Principal investigator, Rush University Medical CenterCraig Della Valle, MD, Principal investigator, Rush University Medical CenterScott Sporer, MD, Principal investigator, Rush University Medical CenterAdolph Lombardi, MD, Principal investigator, Joint Implant Surgeons, Inc.Keith Berend, MD, Principal investigator, Joint Implant Surgeons, Inc.Matt Austin, MD, Principal investigator, Thomas Jefferson Hospital
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT01373112
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- SPACERKNEE
- Status last verified
- Oct 2020
- First submitted
- 6 Jun 2011
- Last updated
- 8 Oct 2020
- Results posted
- No
- Data monitoring committee
- No
Publications
Gooding CR, Masri BA, Duncan CP, Greidanus NV, Garbuz DS. Durable infection control and function with the PROSTALAC spacer in two-stage revision for infected knee arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2011 Apr;469(4):985-93. doi: 10.1007/s11999-010-1579-y.
PubMed 20878287Haleem AA, Berry DJ, Hanssen AD. Mid-term to long-term followup of two-stage reimplantation for infected total knee arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2004 Nov;(428):35-9. doi: 10.1097/01.blo.0000147713.64235.73.
PubMed 15534516Van Thiel GS, Berend KR, Klein GR, Gordon AC, Lombardi AV, Della Valle CJ. Intraoperative molds to create an articulating spacer for the infected knee arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2011 Apr;469(4):994-1001. doi: 10.1007/s11999-010-1644-6.
PubMed 21042896Cuckler JM. The infected total knee: management options. J Arthroplasty. 2005 Jun;20(4 Suppl 2):33-6. doi: 10.1016/j.arth.2005.03.004.
PubMed 15991126Goldman RT, Scuderi GR, Insall JN. 2-stage reimplantation for infected total knee replacement. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1996 Oct;(331):118-24. doi: 10.1097/00003086-199610000-00016.
PubMed 8895627Hirakawa K, Stulberg BN, Wilde AH, Bauer TW, Secic M. Results of 2-stage reimplantation for infected total knee arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty. 1998 Jan;13(1):22-8. doi: 10.1016/s0883-5403(98)90071-7.
PubMed 9493534Emerson RH Jr, Muncie M, Tarbox TR, Higgins LL. Comparison of a static with a mobile spacer in total knee infection. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2002 Nov;(404):132-8. doi: 10.1097/00003086-200211000-00023.
PubMed 12439251Fehring TK, Odum S, Calton TF, Mason JB. Articulating versus static spacers in revision total knee arthroplasty for sepsis. The Ranawat Award. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2000 Nov;(380):9-16. doi: 10.1097/00003086-200011000-00003.
PubMed 11064968Freeman MG, Fehring TK, Odum SM, Fehring K, Griffin WL, Mason JB. Functional advantage of articulating versus static spacers in 2-stage revision for total knee arthroplasty infection. J Arthroplasty. 2007 Dec;22(8):1116-21. doi: 10.1016/j.arth.2007.04.009.
PubMed 18078879Hsu YC, Cheng HC, Ng TP, Chiu KY. Antibiotic-loaded cement articulating spacer for 2-stage reimplantation in infected total knee arthroplasty: a simple and economic method. J Arthroplasty. 2007 Oct;22(7):1060-6. doi: 10.1016/j.arth.2007.04.028.
PubMed 17920482Jamsen E, Sheng P, Halonen P, Lehto MU, Moilanen T, Pajamaki J, Puolakka T, Konttinen YT. Spacer prostheses in two-stage revision of infected knee arthroplasty. Int Orthop. 2006 Aug;30(4):257-61. doi: 10.1007/s00264-006-0102-2. Epub 2006 Mar 25.
PubMed 16565839Haddad FS, Masri BA, Campbell D, McGraw RW, Beauchamp CP, Duncan CP. The PROSTALAC functional spacer in two-stage revision for infected knee replacements. Prosthesis of antibiotic-loaded acrylic cement. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2000 Aug;82(6):807-12. doi: 10.1302/0301-620x.82b6.10486.
PubMed 10990301Hart WJ, Jones RS. Two-stage revision of infected total knee replacements using articulating cement spacers and short-term antibiotic therapy. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2006 Aug;88(8):1011-5. doi: 10.1302/0301-620X.88B8.17445.
PubMed 16877598Hofmann AA, Kane KR, Tkach TK, Plaster RL, Camargo MP. Treatment of infected total knee arthroplasty using an articulating spacer. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1995 Dec;(321):45-54.
PubMed 7497685Meek RM, Dunlop D, Garbuz DS, McGraw R, Greidanus NV, Masri BA. Patient satisfaction and functional status after aseptic versus septic revision total knee arthroplasty using the PROSTALAC articulating spacer. J Arthroplasty. 2004 Oct;19(7):874-9. doi: 10.1016/j.arth.2004.06.028.
PubMed 15483804
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 8 Oct 2020. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- Articulating Versus Static Antibiotic Loaded Spacers for the Treatment of Prosthetic Knee Infection
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT01373112
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- SPACERKNEE
- Conditions
- Osteoarthritis, Knee Infection, Prosthetic Joint Infection, Complications; Arthroplasty, Infection or Inflammation, Complications; Arthroplasty
- Keywords
- arthroplasty, knee replacement, Osteoarthritis, knee Infection, Prosthetic Joint Infection, Complications; Arthroplasty, Infection or Inflammation, Complications; Arthroplasty
- Study type
- Interventional
- Recruitment status
- Completed
- Enrolment
- 68 participants (actual)
- Lead sponsor
- Rush University Medical CenterUniversity, hospital or other
- Collaborators
- Central DuPage Hospital, Joint Implant Surgeons, Inc., Thomas Jefferson University
- Study start
- Dec 2011
- Primary completion
- Aug 2020 (actual)
- Study completion
- Aug 2020 (actual)
- First posted
- 14 Jun 2011 (estimated)
- Results
- Not posted in the source record
Clinical summary
The research question as the sponsor registered it. This describes what the study plans to test, not what it found.
Infection remains a difficult-to-treat complication of total knee arthroplasty. The gold standard treatment is two-stage removal of the prosthesis with later replacement of permanent implants. The first stage consists of removal of the infected arthroplasty components and the surrounding devitalized tissue, copious pulsed irrigation, and placement of a temporary antibiotic-impregnated cement spacer. This spacer typically is left in place six weeks, during which time the patient receives intravenous antibiotics. After the surgeon feels that the infection has been eradicated, or if the patient requires repeat debridement, a second operative procedure is performed. While the use of an antibiotic-loaded spacer is well accepted, whether the spacer should immobilize the knee (a so-called "static" spacer) or allow for range of motion (a so-called "articulating" spacer) is controversial. Proponents of articulating spacers argue that they prevent scarring of the musculature surrounding the knee resulting in easier reimplantation, improved long-term knee function, and improved range of motion. Proponents of static spacers argue that immobilization of the periarticular soft tissues aids in clearance of the infection and is simpler to fashion intraoperatively. While good results have been described with both methods, comparative trials have been conflicting as to whether spacer design alters knee function, operative time, and range of motion. Equipoise exists within the literature, and no randomized clinical trial has been conducted to evaluate this issue.
The purpose of this study is to compare articulating and static antibiotic-impregnated spacers for the treatment of chronic periprosthetic infection complicating total knee arthroplasty through a prospective, randomized clinical trial. The goals of this trial are to determine the effect of spacer design upon eradication of infection, knee function, ease of reimplantation, and range of motion. The investigators hypothesize that articulating spacers will provide shorter operative times at reimplantation, while improving knee function and range of motion.
Detailed description
After diagnosis of infection and informed consent, patients will be taken to the operating room. After anesthetization, patients will be randomized to either an articulating spacer or a static spacer. Randomization will be performed by prepared opaque envelopes administered by a nonparticipant in the study. After a complete debridement of devitalized tissue, explantation of the infected components and any associated cement, either an articulating or static spacer will be placed. All spacers will be formed of 3 g of Vancomycin and 1 g of Tobramycin for each 40 g packet of cement. Articulating spacers will be formed of antibiotic impregnated cement using the Stage One system (Biomet, Warsaw, IN). Static spacers will be hand-made to fit the femoral and tibial exposed metaphyses as a solid block with associated antibiotic cement coated tibial and femoral intramedullary rod, such that knee motion will be minimized.
Post-operatively, all patients will be made touch-down weight bearing protected with a walker or crutches. If a static spacer is placed, patients will be immobilized using with a knee immobilizer. If an articulating spacer is utilized, range of motion will be allowed to the limits of stability as determined in the operating room and protected with a hinged knee brace. At the time of reoperation, the joint will be aspirated and multiple cultures obtained along with intraoperative histopathological analysis to evaluate for persistent infection.
Data collected preoperatively will include age, gender, laterality, etiology of knee degeneration, comorbidities, Knee Society score, and infecting organisms. The Knee Society score has been used extensively in the study of revision knee arthroplasty and has been found to be reliable and valid and will be determined pre-operatively and at all follow-up visits.
Data collected at the time of implant removal and reimplantation will include operative time, blood loss, and need for an extensile exposure. Radiographs performed immediately following and just prior to reimplantation will be reviewed to determine if the spacer utilized has caused bone loss; bone loss to the cut bony surfaces will be confirmed intraoperatively. At each follow-up visit radiographic appearance, the Knee Society Score, knee range of motion, recurrence of infection, and the need for revision or reoperation of any kind on the knee will be determined.
All portions of this study will be part of conventional care except for randomization to either a static or articulating spacer. Which type of spacer is used currently depends upon the judgment of the attending surgeons and both are used routinely.
The primary outcome variable will be range of motion. A power analysis was conducted with the assistance of Dr. Mario Moric at Rush using range of motion as our primary outcome variable, with standard deviations culled from two of the largest series to date -Van Thiel and colleagues (2010) and Fehring and colleagues (2000). For an 80% chance of detecting a predetermined clinically significant difference of 10 degrees, 53 patients per group, 106 patients total, will be needed. To account for attrition, our target sample size will be 140 patients.
Study design
- Primary purpose
- Treatment
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- None (open label)
- Number of arms
- 2
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| Static Spacer | Experimental | Procedure: Static SpacerAfter diagnosis of infection and informed consent, patients will be taken to the operating room. After anesthetization, patients will be randomized to either an articulating spacer or a static spacer. Randomization will be performed by prepared opaque envelopes administered by a nonparticipant in the study. After a complete debridement of devitalized tissue, explantation of the infected components and any associated cement, either an articulating or static spacer will be placed. All spacers will be formed of 3 g of Vancomycin and 1 g of Tobramycin for each 40 g packet of cement. Static spacers will be hand-made to fit the femoral and tibial exposed metaphyses as a solid block with associated antibiotic cement coated tibial and femoral intramedullary rod, such that knee motion will be minimized. |
| Articulating Spacer | Experimental | Procedure: Articulating SpacerAfter diagnosis of infection and informed consent, patients will be taken to the operating room. After anesthetization, patients will be randomized to either an articulating spacer or a static spacer. Randomization will be performed by prepared opaque envelopes administered by a nonparticipant in the study. After a complete debridement of devitalized tissue, explantation of the infected components and any associated cement, either an articulating or static spacer will be placed. All spacers will be formed of 3 g of Vancomycin and 1 g of Tobramycin for each 40 g packet of cement. Articulating spacers will be formed of antibiotic impregnated cement using the Stage One system (Biomet, Warsaw, IN). |
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 18 to 100 years
- Sex
- All
- Healthy volunteers
- Not accepted
- Age groups
- Adult, Older adult
Key inclusion criteria (1 listed)
- 1) Diagnosis of a periprosthetic joint infection of a primary total knee arthroplasty with a planned two-stage exchange procedure.
Key exclusion criteria (5 listed)
- Infection of a revision as opposed to a primary total knee arthroplasty
- Medically unfit for operative intervention
- Extensive bone loss preventing the use of an articulating spacer
- Soft tissue defects that prevent the use of an articulating spacer
- Known allergy to polymethylmethacrylate, tobramycin or vancomycin.
Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening; this overview does not establish that a patient qualifies. Full inclusion and exclusion criteria.
Interventions
| Intervention | Type | Arms |
|---|---|---|
| Static SpacerAfter diagnosis of infection and informed consent, patients will be taken to the operating room. After anesthetization, patients will be randomized to either an articulating spacer or a static spacer. Randomization will be performed by prepared opaque envelopes administered by a nonparticipant in the study. After a complete debridement of devitalized tissue, explantation of the infected components and any associated cement, either an articulating or static spacer will be placed. All spacers will be formed of 3 g of Vancomycin and 1 g of Tobramycin for each 40 g packet of cement. Static spacers will be hand-made to fit the femoral and tibial exposed metaphyses as a solid block with associated antibiotic cement coated tibial and femoral intramedullary rod, such that knee motion will be minimized. | Procedure or surgery | Static Spacer |
| Articulating SpacerAfter diagnosis of infection and informed consent, patients will be taken to the operating room. After anesthetization, patients will be randomized to either an articulating spacer or a static spacer. Randomization will be performed by prepared opaque envelopes administered by a nonparticipant in the study. After a complete debridement of devitalized tissue, explantation of the infected components and any associated cement, either an articulating or static spacer will be placed. All spacers will be formed of 3 g of Vancomycin and 1 g of Tobramycin for each 40 g packet of cement. Articulating spacers will be formed of antibiotic impregnated cement using the Stage One system (Biomet, Warsaw, IN). | Procedure or surgery | Articulating Spacer |
Primary outcome
Range of motion
Time frame: Outcomes will be collected until 2 years post-operatively.
2 secondary outcomes
Knee Society Score
Time frame: Outcomes will be collected until 2 years post-operatively.
Operative time
Time frame: Outcomes will be collected until 2 years post-operatively.
Results and safety
The study is completed, but results are not available in the source record. That does not mean the treatment did or did not work.
Research links
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govLast updated by the sponsor 8 Oct 2020.
- Background: PubMed 20878287Gooding CR, Masri BA, Duncan CP, Greidanus NV, Garbuz DS. Durable infection control and function with the PROSTALAC spacer in two-stage revision for infected knee arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2011 Apr;469(4):985-93. doi: 10.1007/s11999-010-1579-y.
- Background: PubMed 15534516Haleem AA, Berry DJ, Hanssen AD. Mid-term to long-term followup of two-stage reimplantation for infected total knee arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2004 Nov;(428):35-9. doi: 10.1097/01.blo.0000147713.64235.73.
- Background: PubMed 21042896Van Thiel GS, Berend KR, Klein GR, Gordon AC, Lombardi AV, Della Valle CJ. Intraoperative molds to create an articulating spacer for the infected knee arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2011 Apr;469(4):994-1001. doi: 10.1007/s11999-010-1644-6.
- Background: PubMed 15991126Cuckler JM. The infected total knee: management options. J Arthroplasty. 2005 Jun;20(4 Suppl 2):33-6. doi: 10.1016/j.arth.2005.03.004.
- Background: PubMed 8895627Goldman RT, Scuderi GR, Insall JN. 2-stage reimplantation for infected total knee replacement. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1996 Oct;(331):118-24. doi: 10.1097/00003086-199610000-00016.
- Background: PubMed 9493534Hirakawa K, Stulberg BN, Wilde AH, Bauer TW, Secic M. Results of 2-stage reimplantation for infected total knee arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty. 1998 Jan;13(1):22-8. doi: 10.1016/s0883-5403(98)90071-7.
- Background: PubMed 12439251Emerson RH Jr, Muncie M, Tarbox TR, Higgins LL. Comparison of a static with a mobile spacer in total knee infection. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2002 Nov;(404):132-8. doi: 10.1097/00003086-200211000-00023.
- Background: PubMed 11064968Fehring TK, Odum S, Calton TF, Mason JB. Articulating versus static spacers in revision total knee arthroplasty for sepsis. The Ranawat Award. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2000 Nov;(380):9-16. doi: 10.1097/00003086-200011000-00003.
- Background: PubMed 18078879Freeman MG, Fehring TK, Odum SM, Fehring K, Griffin WL, Mason JB. Functional advantage of articulating versus static spacers in 2-stage revision for total knee arthroplasty infection. J Arthroplasty. 2007 Dec;22(8):1116-21. doi: 10.1016/j.arth.2007.04.009.
- Background: PubMed 17920482Hsu YC, Cheng HC, Ng TP, Chiu KY. Antibiotic-loaded cement articulating spacer for 2-stage reimplantation in infected total knee arthroplasty: a simple and economic method. J Arthroplasty. 2007 Oct;22(7):1060-6. doi: 10.1016/j.arth.2007.04.028.
- Background: PubMed 16565839Jamsen E, Sheng P, Halonen P, Lehto MU, Moilanen T, Pajamaki J, Puolakka T, Konttinen YT. Spacer prostheses in two-stage revision of infected knee arthroplasty. Int Orthop. 2006 Aug;30(4):257-61. doi: 10.1007/s00264-006-0102-2. Epub 2006 Mar 25.
- Background: PubMed 10990301Haddad FS, Masri BA, Campbell D, McGraw RW, Beauchamp CP, Duncan CP. The PROSTALAC functional spacer in two-stage revision for infected knee replacements. Prosthesis of antibiotic-loaded acrylic cement. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2000 Aug;82(6):807-12. doi: 10.1302/0301-620x.82b6.10486.
Related trials for Osteoarthritis
Not yet recruiting
Holistic Healing for Knee Osteoarthritis
Knee Osteoarthritis (Knee OA)
Active, not recruiting
Effectiveness of Therapeutic Exercises on Spinopelvic Mobility
Osteoarthritis (OA) of the Hip
Recruiting
Effect of Anti-inflammatory Diet in Osteoarthritis
Osteoarthritis, Knee
Active, not recruitingPhase 2/3
Single vs Triple Hyaluronic Acid in Knee Osteoarthritis
Osteoarthritis, Knee
Not yet recruiting
The Feasibility of a Virtual/Home-based OA Treatment Program in Older Adults With OA and Multimorbidity
Osteoarthritis of the Knee
Referral and contact
AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals. Contact the study team or a site listed below; they decide who can take part. This study is not recruiting at the moment.
Peter Chalmers, MD principal investigator
Rush University Medical Center
Craig Della Valle, MD principal investigator
Rush University Medical Center
Scott Sporer, MD principal investigator
Rush University Medical Center
1 site in 1 country: see every site and its status.
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
A study testing Static Spacer and Articulating Spacer in people with Osteoarthritis and Knee Infection, run by Rush University Medical Center at 1 site in United States.
The full registered description is in the About this study section and the official record.
Who may be eligible to take part?
The sponsor lists 1 inclusion and 5 exclusion criteria. Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening, so read the full criteria and contact a listed site.
Is this clinical trial currently recruiting?
The record says: finished, as of the sponsor's last update on 8 Oct 2020. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.
Where is the study taking place?
The record lists 1 site in United States. Whether a site is taking part right now should be confirmed with that site. See every site.
What are the possible benefits and risks?
They depend on the study and the treatment, and no study can promise a benefit. The study team explains the known risks during informed consent, before anyone joins; the record itself does not list them.
Are results available for this study?
The study is completed, but results are not available in the source record. That does not mean the treatment did or did not work.
How can a doctor refer a patient or contact the research team?
The record lists no contact. The official record names the sponsor, who can be asked directly. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.
What does the primary outcome measure?
Range of motion (time frame: Outcomes will be collected until 2 years post-operatively.). It is what the study was designed to measure, not a finding.
Where can I read the original study information?
On the ClinicalTrials.gov record for NCT01373112, which also lists 21 linked publications.
Does a listing mean the treatment is approved or proven to work?
No. A listing means the study is registered. It does not show that the treatment is safe, works, or is approved by a regulator.
How often is this information updated?
AzTrials copies changed records from ClinicalTrials.gov every night and reloads the whole registry every week. The sponsor last updated this record on 8 Oct 2020.