Status and phase
Conditions
Treatments
About
The primary objective of this investigation is to compare the precision of long leg alignment achieved by the two types of procedure. The secondary objectives of this investigation are to:
Compare the accuracy of long leg alignment achieved by the two types of procedure.
Compare the number of optimal implantations achieved by the two types of procedure.
Compare the clinical performance of the knee replacement in subjects who have undergone one of the two types of procedure.
Compare the functional outcome achieved by subjects who have undergone one of the two types of procedure.
Compare the interface radiographic appearance 5 years post-operatively between the two types of procedure.
Compare the accuracy and precision of long leg alignment achieved by the two types of procedure 5 years post-operatively, i.e., at final follow-up and also the change in accuracy and precision between the final follow-up and baseline.
Compare the Adverse Events experienced by the subjects who have undergone the two types of procedure.
Full description
Primary endpoint: to compare the precision of the long leg alignment of the Ci MiTKA vs. the non navigated conventional TKA, specifically 3 months to demonstrate the variability of the mechanical axis.
Secondary endpoints: to compare the precision of the long leg alignment of the Ci MiTKA vs. the non navigated conventional TKA specifically to demonstrate the proportion of procedures that fall within a satisfactory alignment window in either group.
Enrollment
Sex
Ages
Volunteers
Inclusion criteria
Exclusion criteria
Primary purpose
Allocation
Interventional model
Masking
86 participants in 2 patient groups
Loading...
Data sourced from clinicaltrials.gov
Clinical trials
Research sites
Resources
Legal