AzTrials
AzTrials

Knee Arthroplasty, TotalNCT04450485

Surgical Approach in Fast Track Knee Arthroplasty

A study testing Total knee arthroplasty in people with Knee Arthroplasty, Total, run by Pamukkale University at 1 site in Turkey (Türkiye).

Completed

Finished. The study has ended and is not enrolling. Results may be posted on the official record.

Official record
Search all trials

Trial summary

Nowadays, due to the demands to improve life and health conditions of osteoarthritis patients, more effective surgical treatment methods are needed to obtain satisfactory results when performing total knee arthroplasty (TKA). Read more about this study

Who is it for?
Ages 50 to 85 years
Conditions the study is for
Knee Arthroplasty, Total
What is being tested?
Total knee arthroplasty
Type of treatment
Surgery or procedure
Could I receive a placebo?
No, everyone receives an active treatment
How many people
54 participants
Where
1 siteTurkey (Türkiye)
Study dates
1 May 2018to 30 Jul 2019
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 50 to 85 years
  • All sexes
  • No healthy volunteers
  • Adult, Older adult

Who may be able to join

  • Patients scheduled for unilateral TKA surgery due to primary OA
  • Patients capable of understanding verbal and written instructions.

Who cannot join

  • Revision TKA surgery
  • ASA score >3
  • previous major orthopedic surgery in either lower extremities
  • neurologic compromise
  • psychiatric problems
  • regular hypnotic and/or anxiolytic medication usage
  • dementia
  • patients participated in a particular physical activity program within the last 3 months.

Trial locations and contacts

1 site in 1 country.

Turkey (Türkiye)1 site
  • Pamukkale University Medical Faculty

    Denizli, 20070

Other trials in Turkey (Türkiye)

About this study

Official title: Does Mini Mid-Vastus Approach Have An Advantageous Effect On Rapid Recovery Protocols Over Medial Parapatellar Approach In Total Knee Arthroplasty? A Prospective, Randomized, Single-Blinded Study

Nowadays, due to the demands to improve life and health conditions of osteoarthritis patients, more effective surgical treatment methods are needed to obtain satisfactory results when performing total knee arthroplasty (TKA). Fast-track surgical protocols are evidence based multidisciplinary approaches targeted on multimodal patient care and primarily focused on enhancing rapid functional recovery of the patients. These protocols recommend use of minimal invasive approaches for TKA patients to enhance rapid recovery. Although studies in the literature has been reported similar results in medial para-patellar approach (MPP) and minimal invasive approaches in long terms, better surgical outcomes in short term in favor of minimal invasive approaches also encouraged fast-track protocol builders to prefer minimal invasive approaches. However, this recommendation is not evidence based and there is no study comparing surgical outcomes between minimal invasive approaches and MPP approach in terms of pain, length of hospital stays and functional recovery in fast-track TKA patients. Therefore, we aimed to compare the effects of mini mid-vastus (MMV) and MPP approaches on postoperative clinical results (pain, quality of life, functional outcome, and length of hospital stay) in fast-track TKA patients, and to decide whether any additional achievements are obtained with MMV approach in this patient group.

Read the detailed description

Nowadays, due to the demands to improve life and health conditions of OA patients, more effective surgical treatment methods are needed to obtain satisfactory results when performing total knee arthroplasty (TKA). Fast-track surgical protocols are evidence based multidisciplinary approaches targeted on multimodal patient care and primarily focused on enhancing rapid functional recovery of the patients. These protocols include patient education to cope with anxiety and stress of surgery, nutritional planning and avoidance of long hours of fasting, preemptive analgesia, avoidance of tourniquet use, rational antibiotic prophylaxis, local infiltration anesthesia, and early physical therapy modalities. The ultimate aims of assembling these surgical protocols are to decrease mortality and morbidity, length of hospital stay, and eventually hospital costs while obtaining maximum patient satisfaction.

Surgical approaches when performing TKA operations includes standard medial parapatellar (MPP) approach and minimal invasive approaches such as mini midvastus (MMV) and subvastus (SV) approaches. Possible advantages of not performing quadriceps tendon splitting in MV surgical approach (such as less pain, earlier functional recovery, enhanced quadriceps muscle strength, and better ROM) convinced surgeons to prefer minimal invasive approaches to MPP approach when performing rapid recovery protocols in TKA patients. In addition, better surgical outcomes with traditional protocols in short term reports in favor of minimal invasive approaches also encouraged fast-track protocol builders to prefer minimal invasive approaches. However, these recommendations are not evidence based and, to our knowledge, there is no study comparing surgical outcomes between minimal invasive approaches and MPP approach in terms of pain, length of hospital stay and functional recovery in fast-track TKA patients. Therefore, we aimed to compare the effects of MMV and MPP approaches on postoperative clinical results (pain, quality of life, functional outcome, and length of hospital stay) in fast-track TKA patients, and to decide whether any additional achievements are obtained with MMV approach in this patient group. Our secondary outcome measures were length of operation time, blood loss and postoperative component alignments.

Clinical and demographic variables of the participants were recorded and patients were evaluated preoperatively, at postoperative fourth and twelfth week by a blinded observer. Knee range of motion was assessed with digital goniometer (HALO Medical Devices, Australia); quadriceps muscle strength was measured (unit=newton(N)) with hand-held dynamometer (Commander Muscle Tester, J Tech, USA); The Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Arthritis Index (WOMAC) and Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS) was used to determine patient-reported activity limitations; 30-sec chair-stand test and stair-climb test were performed for performance-based activity limitations; Short Form-36 (SF-36) was used for quality of life evaluations.

Alignment analysis Long leg radiographs of the patients were evaluated preoperatively and postoperatively by using a digital orthopedic templating software-Materialise OrthoView (OrthoView version 7, Materialise HQ, Technologielaan 15 3001 Leuven, Belgium). Hip-knee-ankle angles (HKA), femorotibial angles, lateral proximal femoral angles (LPFA), lateral distal femoral angles (LDFA), medial proximal tibial angles (MPTA), lateral distal tibial angles (LDTA), tibial posterior slope angles were all measured and recorded by a blinded observer.

Preoperative patient education classes All the patients were received preoperative informative classes about TKA procedure, nutritional and nursing support, physical therapy and rehabilitation applications. Booklets concerning all these classes were also handed out to all patients.

Anesthesia Protocol Excluding diabetics, all the patients were received oral carbohydrate (%12.5 carbohydrate liquid solution-Fantomalt, Nutricia) loading on the night before the operation (between 19:00 and 23:00) and 2 hours before the operation. Solid foods were allowed up to 6 hours before the operation and liquids allowed up to 2 hours preoperatively. Early oral feeding was started at 4 to 6 hours postoperatively for all patients. Intravenous midazolam 1-2 mg and fentanyl 50-100 μg were applied to all patients 30-45 minutes preoperatively. Except 12 patients, all patients received spinal anesthesia. Seven patients due to previous lumber fusion and 5 patients due to personal preference were received general anesthesia.

Surgical Technique All the operations were performed by the same surgeon using the same brand and type of prosthesis. MPP and MMV approaches were performed as described in the literature. All the patients received posterior stabilized fixed bearing TKA (NexGen Legacy® Posterior Stabilized Knee-Fixed Bearing, Zimmer-Biomet Inc., Warsaw, Indiana 46580, ABD), and high viscosity polymethyl methacrylate (PMMA) bone cement (Oliga-G21 srl-Vias. Pertini, 8-41039 San Posidonia (MO)-Italy). All the operations were performed without using tourniquet.

Local infiltration anesthesia (LIA) (20 cc bupivacaine hydrochloride, 1 gr fentanyl, 1 gr cefazolin sodium, 0.3 ml epinephrine, and dilute volume of physiologic serum (%0,9 NaCl) to 50 cc) to posterior capsule just before the application of permanent implants, and to anterior capsule, prepatellar fat pad and peri ligamentous nociceptive receptors following consolidation of bone cement was injected.

One gram of tranexamic acid was injected intravenously (iv) at least 30 minutes before the incision, 1 gr diluted to 30 cc by physiologic serum (%0,9 NaCl) was given intraarticularly following the closure of the wound, and another 1 gr was infused 2 hours after the operation.

Preoperative and postoperative analgesia protocol For preemptive analgesia, paracetamol 500 mg tablets were prescribed 3 times 2 tablets per day beginning from 3 days before the operation. One gram of iv infusion of paracetamol was given just after the operation in postoperative care unit and continued as 3 times 1gr iv infusion. First line rescue analgesic was intramuscular 75 mg diclofenac sodium and second line analgesic was iv 100 mg tramadol hydrochloride.

Antibiotic and thrombosis prophylaxis protocol One gr of cefazolin sodium iv was applied 30 minutes before the incision as antibiotic prophylaxis. Low molecular weight heparin-enoxaparin sodium 4000 iu/0.8 ml/day was used subcutaneously as thromboembolic prophylaxis starting at the 6-8 hours postoperatively and continued for 20 days.

Rehabilitation protocol and discharge criteria The patients were mobilized at the 4th hour following surgery and standard physiotherapy program was scheduled during hospitalization (cold-pack -once in every 2 hours for 15 minutes, ankle pump exercises, quadriceps isometric exercises, active assisted heel slide exercises in bed and knee flexion exercises in sitting position/3 sets×10 repeats). The patients were evaluated regularly every two hours during postoperative period and those fulfilling discharge criteria were released from the hospital and length of hospital stay was recorded for every patient. The standard discharge criteria were as follows: VAS score at rest <3, VAS score during mobilization <5, able to get dressed independently, able to get in and out of bed, able to sit and rise from a chair/toilet seat, independence in personal care, mobilization with walker/crutches, able to walk >70 meters without risk of fall with walking aid, no incision problem.

The discharged patients were instructed for a standard home-based exercise program. Patients were also asked to visit the ward at a biweekly interval for the update of the exercise program for the first 8 weeks. 15-40 minutes of walking exercises were also prescribed for 5 days/week between 9th and 12th weeks.

Statistical analysis Priori power analysis concerning quadriceps muscle strength showed that at an effect size of d=0.7, 52 patients are needed (26 patients for each group) to obtain 80 % power (1-beta=0.80) with 95 % confidence interval (alpha=0.05).

The data was analyzed using SPSS 24.0 (IBM Corp. Released 2016. IBM SPSS Statistics for Windows, Version 24.0. Armonk, NY: IBM Corp.) package program. Continuous variables were given as mean ± standard deviation, median (minimum and maximum) and categorical variable values were presented as absolute numbers and percentages. The conformity of continuous variables with normal distribution was evaluated using the Shapiro-Wilk test. Independent Samples t-test for parametric test assumptions and Mann-Whitney U Test for non-parametric test assumptions were used for comparison of the groups. One-way repeated-measure ANOVA was used to compare the normally distributed data from the parameters repeatedly measured in the inner-group analysis, and Friedman analysis of variance was performed for the remaining data set. Statistical significance was set at p ≤ 0.05.

Being tested
Total knee arthroplasty
Keywords
Total knee arthroplasty; Surgical approach; Fast track

What participants receive

What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.

  • Total knee arthroplastyProcedure or surgery

    Total knee arthroplasty

Study groups in NCT04450485
Study groupRoleWhat they receive
Medial para-patellar approachActive comparatorFast track protocol applied total knee arthroplasty patients operated by using medial para-patellar approach
Receives: Procedure: Total knee arthroplasty
Mini mid-vastus approachActive comparatorFast track protocol applied total knee arthroplasty patients operated by using mini mid-vastus approach
Receives: Procedure: Total knee arthroplasty

What is being measured

The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.

  1. Pain preoperative

    Visual Analog Scale used to assess pain

    Measured: Baseline (preoperatively)

  2. Pain postoperative 1

    Visual Analog Scale used to assess pain

    Measured: at postoperative fourth weeks

  3. Pain postoperative 2

    Visual Analog Scale used to assess pain

    Measured: at postoperative twelfth weeks

  4. Knee Range of Motion preoperative

    Digital goniometer (HALO Medical Devices, Australia) used to assess knee range of motion

    Measured: Baseline (preoperatively)

  5. Knee Range of Motion postoperative 1

    Digital goniometer (HALO Medical Devices, Australia) used to assess knee range of motion

    Measured: at postoperative fourth week

  6. Knee Range of Motion postoperative 2

    Digital goniometer (HALO Medical Devices, Australia) used to assess knee range of motion

    Measured: at postoperative twelfth week

  7. Quadriceps muscle strength preoperative

    Quadriceps muscle strength is measured (unit=newton(N)) with hand-held dynamometer (Commander Muscle Tester, J Tech, USA)

    Measured: Baseline (preoperatively)

  8. Quadriceps muscle strength postoperative 1

    Quadriceps muscle strength is measured (unit=newton(N)) with hand-held dynamometer (Commander Muscle Tester, J Tech, USA)

    Measured: at postoperative fourth weeks

  9. Quadriceps muscle strength postoperative 2

    Quadriceps muscle strength is measured (unit=newton(N)) with hand-held dynamometer (Commander Muscle Tester, J Tech, USA)

    Measured: at postoperative twelfth weeks

  10. Patient-reported activity limitations preoperative

    The Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Arthritis Index and Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score are used

    Measured: Baseline (preoperatively)

  11. Patient-reported activity limitations postoperative 1

    The Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Arthritis Index and Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score are used

    Measured: at postoperative fourth weeks

  12. Patient-reported activity limitations postoperative 2

    The Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Arthritis Index and Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score are used

    Measured: at postoperative twelfth weeks

  13. Performance-based activity limitations-preoperative

    30-sec chair-stand test and stair-climb test are used

    Measured: Baseline (preoperatively)

  14. Performance-based activity limitations- postoperative 1

    30-sec chair-stand test and stair-climb test are used

    Measured: at postoperative fourth weeks

  15. Performance-based activity limitations - postoperative 2

    30-sec chair-stand test and stair-climb test are used

    Measured: at postoperative twelfth weeks

  16. Quality of life-preoperative

    Short Form-36 (SF-36) is used

    Measured: Baseline (preoperatively)

  17. Quality of life-preoperative- postoperative 1

    Short Form-36 (SF-36) is used

    Measured: at postoperative fourth weeks

  18. Quality of life-preoperative- postoperative 2

    Short Form-36 (SF-36) is used

    Measured: at postoperative twelfth weeks

  19. Length of hospital stay

    Length of hospital stay is measured beginning from the hospitalization of the patient and ending at discharge of the patients (unit-hours)

    Measured: through study completion, an average of 1 year

Secondary outcomes (3)
  1. Length of operation time

    Length of operation time is measured in minutes during the surgery

    Measured: the surgery

  2. Amount of blood loss

    Amount of blood loss is measured from the suction drainage (unit-milliliters)

    Measured: through study completion, an average of 1 year

  3. postoperative component alignments

    Long leg radiographs of the patients are evaluated postoperatively by using a digital orthopedic templating software-Materialise OrthoView (OrthoView version 7, Materialise HQ, Technologielaan 15 3001 Leuven, Belgium).

    Measured: through study completion, an average of 1 year

Timeline

From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.

  1. First posted29 Jun 2020
  2. Study start1 May 2018
  3. Primary completion30 Mar 2019
  4. Study completion30 Jul 2019

Resources

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
Model description
Patients planned for fast track protocol applied total knee arthroplasty randomized into two groups by a computer program to generate random numbers and assign participants to either to mini mid-vastus or medial para-patellar surgical approach group
Masking
Double blind
Who is masked
Participant, Outcomes assessor
Enrolment
54 participants (actual)
IDs, dates and publications
ClinicalTrials.gov ID
NCT04450485
Sponsor's protocol ID
2018TIPF017
Status last verified
Jun 2020
First submitted
23 Jun 2020
Last updated
29 Jun 2020
Results posted
No
Data monitoring committee
No
FDA-regulated drug
No
FDA-regulated device
No
Individual data sharing
No

Publications

  • Husted H. Fast-track hip and knee arthroplasty: clinical and organizational aspects. Acta Orthop Suppl. 2012 Oct;83(346):1-39. doi: 10.3109/17453674.2012.700593.

    PubMed 23205862
  • Stowers MD, Manuopangai L, Hill AG, Gray JR, Coleman B, Munro JT. Enhanced Recovery After Surgery in elective hip and knee arthroplasty reduces length of hospital stay. ANZ J Surg. 2016 Jun;86(6):475-9. doi: 10.1111/ans.13538. Epub 2016 Mar 28.

    PubMed 27018137
  • Heekin RD, Fokin AA. Mini-midvastus versus mini-medial parapatellar approach for minimally invasive total knee arthroplasty: outcomes pendulum is at equilibrium. J Arthroplasty. 2014 Feb;29(2):339-42. doi: 10.1016/j.arth.2013.05.016. Epub 2013 Jun 19.

    PubMed 23790343
  • Karpman RR, Smith HL. Comparison of the early results of minimally invasive vs standard approaches to total knee arthroplasty: a prospective, randomized study. J Arthroplasty. 2009 Aug;24(5):681-8. doi: 10.1016/j.arth.2008.03.011. Epub 2008 Jun 6.

    PubMed 18538536
  • Chin PL, Foo LS, Yang KY, Yeo SJ, Lo NN. Randomized controlled trial comparing the radiologic outcomes of conventional and minimally invasive techniques for total knee arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty. 2007 Sep;22(6):800-6. doi: 10.1016/j.arth.2006.10.009. Epub 2007 Apr 20.

    PubMed 17826268
  • Dalury DF, Jiranek WA. A comparison of the midvastus and paramedian approaches for total knee arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty. 1999 Jan;14(1):33-7. doi: 10.1016/s0883-5403(99)90199-7.

    PubMed 9926950
  • White RE Jr, Allman JK, Trauger JA, Dales BH. Clinical comparison of the midvastus and medial parapatellar surgical approaches. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1999 Oct;(367):117-22.

    PubMed 10546605
  • Stevens-Lapsley JE, Bade MJ, Shulman BC, Kohrt WM, Dayton MR. Minimally invasive total knee arthroplasty improves early knee strength but not functional performance: a randomized controlled trial. J Arthroplasty. 2012 Dec;27(10):1812-1819.e2. doi: 10.1016/j.arth.2012.02.016. Epub 2012 Mar 28.

    PubMed 22459124
  • Lin WP, Lin J, Horng LC, Chang SM, Jiang CC. Quadriceps-sparing, minimal-incision total knee arthroplasty: a comparative study. J Arthroplasty. 2009 Oct;24(7):1024-32. doi: 10.1016/j.arth.2008.07.005. Epub 2008 Aug 30.

    PubMed 18757172
  • Nestor BJ, Toulson CE, Backus SI, Lyman SL, Foote KL, Windsor RE. Mini-midvastus vs standard medial parapatellar approach: a prospective, randomized, double-blinded study in patients undergoing bilateral total knee arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty. 2010 Sep;25(6 Suppl):5-11, 11.e1. doi: 10.1016/j.arth.2010.04.003. Epub 2010 Jun 11.

    PubMed 20541889
  • Kazarian GS, Siow MY, Chen AF, Deirmengian CA. Comparison of Quadriceps-Sparing and Medial Parapatellar Approaches in Total Knee Arthroplasty: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials. J Arthroplasty. 2018 Jan;33(1):277-283. doi: 10.1016/j.arth.2017.08.025. Epub 2017 Aug 30.

    PubMed 28947369

Questions about this trial

What is this clinical trial studying?

A study testing Total knee arthroplasty in people with Knee Arthroplasty, Total, run by Pamukkale University at 1 site in Turkey (Türkiye).

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 2 inclusion and 8 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 29 Jun 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 Turkey (Türkiye). 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?

Pain preoperative (time frame: Baseline (preoperatively)). The study lists 19 primary outcomes in all. 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 NCT04450485, which also lists 11 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 29 Jun 2020.

Free account

Log in to keep searching

You’ve used your 3 free searches. AzTrials is free: log in or create a free account to keep searching clinical trials and save the ones you want to follow.

Create a free accountLog in