Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
The study was terminated at the point the primary endpoint and early milestones were reached and because long term outcomes were available from other sources
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
The primary objective of this investigation is to evaluate the performance (in terms of post-operative active range of motion at one year) of the P.F.C. Sigma and P.F.C. Sigma Rotating Platform total knee systems in clinical practice.
The secondary objectives of this investigation are:To evaluate the performance of the P.F.C. Sigma and P.F.C. Sigma Rotating Platform total knee systems in clinical practice. To evaluate the impact of patellar resurfacing on the performance of the P.F.C. Sigma and the P.F.C. Sigma Rotating Platform total knee systems. To evaluate the impact of Posterior Cruciate Ligament (PCL) sacrifice or retention on the performance of the P.F.C. Sigma and the P.F.C. Sigma Rotating Platform total knee systems.
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
| Label | Type | Description | Intervention Names |
|---|---|---|---|
| PFC Sigma Fixed Bearing PCL Sacrificed | Other | PFC Sigma Fixed Bearing Total Knee System with PCL Sacrificed |
|
| PFC Sigma RP PCL Sacrificed | Active Comparator | PFC Sigma Rotating Platform Total Knee System with PCL Sacrificed |
|
| PFC Sigma Fixed Bearing PCL Retained | Other | PFC Sigma Fixed Bearing Total Knee System with PCL Retained |
|
| PFC Sigma RP PCL Retained | Active Comparator | PFC Sigma Rotating Platform Total Knee System with PCL Retained |
|
| Name | Type | Description | Arm Group Labels | Other Names |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| P.F.C Sigma Fixed Bearing total knee system | Device | Orthopaedic implant for total knee replacement |
|
| Measure | Description | Time Frame |
|---|---|---|
| To Compare Range of Motion Between Sigma RP and Sigma Fixed Treatment Groups in PCL Sacrificing Arm | Range of motion is knee flexion (how far the patient can bend their knee) minus knee extension (how far the patient can straighten their knee). The result of this subtraction is the range of motion (bending and straightening) for that knee. | 1 year |
| To Compare Range of Motion Between Sigma RP and Sigma Fixed Treatment Groups in PCL Retaining Arm | Range of motion is knee flexion (how far the patient can bend their knee) minus knee extension (how far the patient can straighten their knee). The result of this subtraction is the range of motion (bending and straightening) for that knee. | 1 year |
| To Compare the Change in Range of Motion From Pre-op to 1 Year Between Sigma RP and Sigma Fixed Treatment Groups in PCL Sacrificing Arm | Range of motion is knee flexion (how far the patient can bend their knee) minus knee extension (how far the patient can straighten their knee). The result of this subtraction is the range of motion (bending and straightening) for that knee. | Change from pre-op to 1 year |
| To Compare the Change in Range of Motion From Pre-op to 1 Year Between Sigma RP and Sigma Fixed Treatment Groups in PCL Retaining Arm | Range of motion is knee flexion (how far the patient can bend their knee) minus knee extension (how far the patient can straighten their knee). The result of this subtraction is the range of motion (bending and straightening) for that knee. | Change from pre-op to 1 year |
| Measure | Description | Time Frame |
|---|---|---|
| To Compare the Change in Range of Motion From Pre-op to 2 Years Between Sigma RP and Sigma Fixed Treatment Groups in PCL Sacrificing Arm | Range of motion is knee flexion (how far the patient can bend their knee) minus knee extension (how far the patient can straighten their knee). The result of this subtraction is the range of motion (bending and straightening) for that knee. | Change from pre-op to 2 years |
Not provided
Inclusion Criteria:
Exclusion Criteria:
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
| Facility | Status | City | State | ZIP | Country | Contacts |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Glasgow Royal Infirmary | Glasgow | United Kingdom | ||||
| Glasgow Western Infirmary |
754 subjects were consented into the study, however only 720 received study treatment.
Not provided
Not provided
| ID | Title | Description |
|---|---|---|
| FG000 | PFC Fixed Bearing PCL Sacrificed | Fixed bearing P.F.C Sigma Fixed Bearing Total knee system: Orthopaedic implant for total knee replacement |
| FG001 | PFC Mobile Bearing PCL Sacrificed | Mobile bearing P.F.C Sigma RP Mobile Bearing knee system: Orthopaedic implant for total knee replacement |
| FG002 | PFC Fixed Bearing PCL Retained | Fixed bearing P.F.C Sigma Fixed Bearing Total knee system: Orthopaedic implant for total knee replacement |
| FG003 | PFC Mobile Bearing PCL Retained | Mobile bearing P.F.C Sigma Mobile Bearing Total knee system: Orthopaedic implant for total knee replacement |
| Title | Milestones | Reasons Not Completed | ||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Overall Study |
|
|
All participants who received treatment and were not mis-randomized.
Not provided
| ID | Title | Description |
|---|---|---|
| BG000 | PFC Fixed Bearing PCL Sacrificed | PFC Sigma Fixed Bearing Total Knee System with PCL Sacrificed P.F.C Sigma Fixed Bearing total knee system: Orthopaedic implant for total knee replacement |
| BG001 | PFC Sigma RP PCL Sacrificed |
| Units | Counts |
|---|---|
| Participants |
|
| Title | Description | Population Description | Parameter Type | Dispersion Type | Unit of Measure | Calculate Percentage | Denominator Units Selected | Denominators | Classes |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Age, Continuous | Mean |
| Type | Title | Description | Population Description | Reporting Status | Anticipated Posting Date | Parameter Type | Dispersion Type | Unit of Measure | Calculate Percentage | Time Frame | Units Analyzed | Denominator Units Selected | Arm/Group Information | Denominators | Classes | Analyses | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Primary | To Compare Range of Motion Between Sigma RP and Sigma Fixed Treatment Groups in PCL Sacrificing Arm | Range of motion is knee flexion (how far the patient can bend their knee) minus knee extension (how far the patient can straighten their knee). The result of this subtraction is the range of motion (bending and straightening) for that knee. | Due to consent withdrawals, deaths, lost to follow up, revisions, subjects whose patella were resurfaced, mis-randomized, those who did not wish to continue in the study, and incomplete or unavailable assessments, 168 subjects in the PFC Sigma Fixed Bearing and 167 subjects in the PFC Sigma RP Treatment Groups were available for this outcome. | Posted | Mean | Standard Deviation | degrees | 1 year |
|
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
| ID | Title | Description | Deaths (Affected) | Deaths (At Risk) | Serious Events (Affected) | Serious Events (At Risk) | Other Events (Affected) | Other Events (At Risk) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| EG000 | PFC Fixed Bearing PCL Sacrificed | PFC Sigma Fixed Bearing Total Knee System with PCL Sacrificed P.F.C Sigma Fixed Bearing total knee system: Orthopaedic implant for total knee replacement |
| Term | Organ System | Source Vocabulary | Assessment Type | Notes | Statistical Information |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Anaemia | Blood and lymphatic system disorders | MedDRA 16.0 |
Not provided
Not provided
| Title | Organization | Phone | Extension | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Kimberly Dwyer, Ph.D, CCRA | DePuy International | kdwyer2@its.jnj.com |
Not provided
| ID | Term |
|---|---|
| D020370 | Osteoarthritis, Knee |
| ID | Term |
|---|---|
| D010003 | Osteoarthritis |
| D001168 | Arthritis |
| D007592 | Joint Diseases |
| D009140 | Musculoskeletal Diseases |
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
| P.F.C Sigma RP Mobile Bearing knee system | Device | Orthopaedic implant for total knee replacement |
|
| To Compare the Change in Range of Motion From Pre-op to 2 Years Between Sigma RP and Sigma Fixed Treatment Groups in PCL Retaining Arm | Range of motion is knee flexion (how far the patient can bend their knee) minus knee extension (how far the patient can straighten their knee). The result of this subtraction is the range of motion (bending and straightening) for that knee. | Change from pre-op to 2 years |
| To Compare the Change in Range of Motion From Pre-op to 5 Years Between Sigma RP and Sigma Fixed Treatment Groups in PCL Sacrificing Arm | Range of motion is knee flexion (how far the patient can bend their knee) minus knee extension (how far the patient can straighten their knee). The result of this subtraction is the range of motion (bending and straightening) for that knee. | Change from pre-op to 5 years |
| To Compare the Change in Oxford Knee Score From Pre-op to 2 Years Between Sigma RP and Sigma Fixed Treatment Groups in PCL Retaining Arm | The Oxford Knee Score (OKS) is a 12 to 60 point patient reported outcome (PRO) score (where 12 indicates the best outcome) that evaluates the affected knee. The total score is composed of Pain and Function. | Change from pre-op to 2 years |
| To Compare the Change in Oxford Knee Score From Pre-op to 2 Years Between Sigma RP and Sigma Fixed Treatment Groups in PCL Sacrificing Arm | The Oxford Knee Score (OKS) is a 12 to 60 point patient reported outcome (PRO) score (where 12 indicates the best outcome) that evaluates the affected knee. The total score is composed of Pain and Function. | Change from pre-op to 2 years |
| To Compare the Change in Oxford Knee Score From Pre-op to 5 Years Between Sigma RP and Sigma Fixed Treatment Groups in PCL Sacrificing Arm | The Oxford Knee Score (OKS) is a 12 to 60 point patient reported outcome (PRO) score (where 12 indicates the best outcome) that evaluates the affected knee. The total score is composed of Pain and Function. | Change from pre-op to 5 years |
| To Compare the Change in American Knee Society Knee Score From Pre-op to 2 Years Between Sigma RP and Sigma Fixed Treatment Groups in PCL Sacrificing Arm | American Knee Society (AKS) knee score is a 0-100 point score (where 100 indicates excellent knee condition) that evaluates the affected knee. The knee score is composed of Pain, Range of Motion, and Stability. | Change from pre-op to 2 years |
| To Compare the Change in American Knee Society Knee Score From Pre-op to 2 Years Between Sigma RP and Sigma Fixed Treatment Groups in PCL Retaining Arm | American Knee Society (AKS) knee score is a 0-100 point score (where 100 indicates excellent knee condition) that evaluates the affected knee. The knee score is composed of Pain, Range of Motion, and Stability. | Change from pre-op to 2 years |
| To Compare the Change in American Knee Society Knee Score From Pre-op to 5 Years Between Sigma RP and Sigma Fixed Treatment Groups in PCL Sacrificing Arm | American Knee Society (AKS) knee score is a 0-100 point score (where 100 indicates excellent knee condition) that evaluates the affected knee. The knee score is composed of Pain, Range of Motion, and Stability. | Change from pre-op to 5 years |
| To Compare the Change in American Knee Society Function Score From Pre-op to 2 Years Between Sigma RP and Sigma Fixed Treatment Groups in PCL Sacrificing Arm | American Knee Society (AKS) function score is a 0-100 point score (where 100 indicates excellent knee function) that evaluates the affected knee. The function score is composed of walking and stair climbing ability. | Change from pre-op to 2 years |
| To Compare the Change in American Knee Society Function Score From Pre-op to 2 Years Between Sigma RP and Sigma Fixed Treatment Groups in PCL Retaining Arm | American Knee Society (AKS) function score is a 0-100 point score (where 100 indicates excellent knee function) that evaluates the affected knee. The function score is composed of walking and stair climbing ability. | Change from pre-op to 2 years |
| To Compare the Change in American Knee Society Function Score From Pre-op to 5 Years Between Sigma RP and Sigma Fixed Treatment Groups in PCL Sacrificing Arm | American Knee Society (AKS) function score is a 0-100 point score (where 100 indicates excellent knee function) that evaluates the affected knee. The function score is composed of walking and stair climbing ability. | Change from pre-op to 5 years |
| To Compare the Percentage of Subjects With No Anterior Knee Pain Between Sigma RP and Sigma Fixed Treatment Groups in PCL Sacrificing Arm | Anterior Knee Pain is assessed by the patient into 1 of 4 categories: None, Mild, Moderate, or Severe. The percentage of participants with no anterior knee pain is reported in the data table. | 2 years |
| To Compare the Percentage of Subjects With No Anterior Knee Pain Between Sigma RP and Sigma Fixed Treatment Groups in PCL Retaining Arm | Anterior Knee Pain is assessed by the patient into 1 of 4 categories: None, Mild, Moderate, or Severe. The percentage of participants with no anterior knee pain is reported in the data table. | 2 years |
| To Compare the Percentage of Subjects With No Anterior Knee Pain Between Sigma RP and Sigma Fixed Treatment Groups in PCL Sacrificing Arm | Anterior Knee Pain is assessed by the patient into 1 of 4 categories: None, Mild, Moderate, or Severe. The percentage of participants with no anterior knee pain is reported in the data table. | 5 Years |
| To Compare the Percentage of Subjects With Good Quadriceps Strength Between Sigma RP and Sigma Fixed Treatment Groups in PCL Sacrificing Arm | Quadriceps Strength is assessed by the patient into 1 of 3 categories: Good, Fair, or Poor. The percentage of participants with good quadriceps strength is reported in the data table. | 2 years |
| To Compare the Percentage of Subjects With Good Quadriceps Strength Between Sigma RP and Sigma Fixed Treatment Groups in PCL Retaining Arm | Quadriceps Strength is assessed by the patient into 1 of 3 categories: Good, Fair, or Poor. The percentage of participants with good quadriceps strength is reported in the data table. | 2 years |
| To Compare the Percentage of Subjects With Good Quadriceps Strength Between Sigma RP and Sigma Fixed Treatment Groups in PCL Sacrificing Arm | Quadriceps Strength is assessed by the patient into 1 of 3 categories: Good, Fair, or Poor. The percentage of participants with good quadriceps strength is reported in the data table. | 5 Years |
| To Compare the Change in SF-12 Physical Health Score From Pre-op to 2 Years Between Sigma RP and Sigma Fixed Treatment Groups in PCL Sacrificing Arm | The 12-Item Short Form Health Survey (SF-12) is a patient reported outcome survey that represents overall subjective health status by measuring eight health-related parameters (each scored from 0 [poor health] to 100 [better health]): body pain, general mental health, perception of general health, physical functioning, role limitations caused by mental condition, role limitations caused by a physical condition, social functioning, and vitality. The survey is converted into 2 summary measures that are scored from 0 to 100 (where 100 indicates the highest level of health) - the Physical Component Score (PCS-12) and Mental Component Score (MCS-12). | Change from pre-op to 2 years |
| To Compare the Change in SF-12 Physical Health Score From Pre-op to 2 Years Between Sigma RP and Sigma Fixed Treatment Groups in PCL Retaining Arm | The 12-Item Short Form Health Survey (SF-12) is a patient reported outcome survey that represents overall subjective health status by measuring eight health-related parameters (each scored from 0 [poor health] to 100 [better health]): body pain, general mental health, perception of general health, physical functioning, role limitations caused by mental condition, role limitations caused by a physical condition, social functioning, and vitality. The survey is converted into 2 summary measures that are scored from 0 to 100 (where 100 indicates the highest level of health) - the Physical Component Score (PCS-12) and Mental Component Score (MCS-12). | Change from pre-op to 2 years |
| To Compare the Change in SF-12 Physical Health Score From Pre-op to 5 Years Between Sigma RP and Sigma Fixed Treatment Groups in PCL Sacrificing Arm | The 12-Item Short Form Health Survey (SF-12) is a patient reported outcome survey that represents overall subjective health status by measuring eight health-related parameters (each scored from 0 [poor health] to 100 [better health]): body pain, general mental health, perception of general health, physical functioning, role limitations caused by mental condition, role limitations caused by a physical condition, social functioning, and vitality. The survey is converted into 2 summary measures that are scored from 0 to 100 (where 100 indicates the highest level of health) - the Physical Component Score (PCS-12) and Mental Component Score (MCS-12). | Change from pre-op to 5 years |
| To Compare the Change in SF-12 Mental Health Score From Pre-op to 2 Years Between Sigma RP and Sigma Fixed Treatment Groups in PCL Sacrificing Arm | The 12-Item Short Form Health Survey (SF-12) is a patient reported outcome survey that represents overall subjective health status by measuring eight health-related parameters (each scored from 0 [poor health] to 100 [better health]): body pain, general mental health, perception of general health, physical functioning, role limitations caused by mental condition, role limitations caused by a physical condition, social functioning, and vitality. The survey is converted into 2 summary measures that are scored from 0 to 100 (where 100 indicates the highest level of health) - the Physical Component Score (PCS-12) and Mental Component Score (MCS-12). | Change from pre-op to 2 years |
| To Compare the Change in SF-12 Mental Health Score From Pre-op to 2 Years Between Sigma RP and Sigma Fixed Treatment Groups in PCL Retaining Arm | The 12-Item Short Form Health Survey (SF-12) is a patient reported outcome survey that represents overall subjective health status by measuring eight health-related parameters (each scored from 0 [poor health] to 100 [better health]): body pain, general mental health, perception of general health, physical functioning, role limitations caused by mental condition, role limitations caused by a physical condition, social functioning, and vitality. The survey is converted into 2 summary measures that are scored from 0 to 100 (where 100 indicates the highest level of health) - the Physical Component Score (PCS-12) and Mental Component Score (MCS-12). | Change from pre-op to 2 years |
| To Compare the Change in SF-12 Mental Health Score From Pre-op to 5 Years Between Sigma RP and Sigma Fixed Treatment Groups in PCL Sacrificing Arm | The 12-Item Short Form Health Survey (SF-12) is a patient reported outcome survey that represents overall subjective health status by measuring eight health-related parameters (each scored from 0 [poor health] to 100 [better health]): body pain, general mental health, perception of general health, physical functioning, role limitations caused by mental condition, role limitations caused by a physical condition, social functioning, and vitality. The survey is converted into 2 summary measures that are scored from 0 to 100 (where 100 indicates the highest level of health) - the Physical Component Score (PCS-12) and Mental Component Score (MCS-12). | Change from pre-op to 5 years |
| To Compare the Change in Patella Score From Pre-op to 2 Years Between Sigma RP and Sigma Fixed Treatment Groups in PCL Sacrificing Arm | The Patella Score is completed by the clinicians and assesses the anterior knee pain, quadriceps strength, ability to rise from a chair and stair climbing. The Patella Score ranges from 3 to 30 points with higher scores indicating better functionality and lower scores indicating poorer functionality. | Change from pre-op to 2 years |
| To Compare the Change in Patella Score From Pre-op to 2 Years Between Sigma RP and Sigma Fixed Treatment Groups in PCL Retaining Arm | The Patella Score is completed by the clinicians and assesses the anterior knee pain, quadriceps strength, ability to rise from a chair and stair climbing. The Patella Score ranges from 3 to 30 points with higher scores indicating better functionality and lower scores indicating poorer functionality. | Change from pre-op to 2 years |
| To Compare the Change in Patella Score From Pre-op to 5 Years Between Sigma RP and Sigma Fixed Treatment Groups in PCL Sacrificing Arm | The Patella Score is completed by the clinicians and assesses the anterior knee pain, quadriceps strength, ability to rise from a chair and stair climbing. The Patella Score ranges from 3 to 30 points with higher scores indicating better functionality and lower scores indicating poorer functionality. | Change from pre-op to 5 years |
| To Compare the Percentage of Subjects With at Least 1 Tibial Radiolucency Between Sigma RP and Sigma Fixed Treatment Groups in PCL Sacrificing Arm | Tibial Radiolucency observes a radiolucent line (of 0.5mm or wider) on the radiograph around the tibial component. | 2 years |
| To Compare the Percentage of Subjects With at Least 1 Tibial Radiolucency Between Sigma RP and Sigma Fixed Treatment Groups in PCL Retaining Arm | Tibial Radiolucency observes a radiolucent line (of 0.5mm or wider) on the radiograph around the tibial component. | 2 years |
| To Compare the Percentage of Subjects With at Least 1 Tibial Radiolucency Between Sigma RP and Sigma Fixed Treatment Groups in PCL Sacrificing Arm | Tibial Radiolucency observes a radiolucent line (of 0.5mm or wider) on the radiograph around the tibial component. | 5 Years |
| To Compare the Percentage of Subjects With Lateral Release Between Sigma RP and Sigma Fixed Treatment Groups in PCL Sacrificing Arm | Lateral release is a surgical procedure to release tight capsular structures (lateral retinaculum) on the outside of the kneecap (patella). It is performed during knee surgery and allows the kneecap to move smoothly in the center of the knee. Rate information was collected at time of study surgery. | Operative |
| To Compare the Percentage of Subjects With Lateral Release Between Sigma RP and Sigma Fixed Treatment Groups in PCL Retaining Arm | Lateral release is a surgical procedure to release tight capsular structures (lateral retinaculum) on the outside of the kneecap (patella). It is performed during knee surgery and allows the kneecap to move smoothly in the center of the knee. Rate information was collected at time of study surgery. | Operative |
| To Compare the Survivorship Analysis Results Between Sigma RP and Sigma Fixed Treatment Groups in PCL Sacrificing Arm | Kaplan Meier survivorship analysis estimates the proportion of a population that will survive past a certain time avoiding a certain event. In this study, the event is removal of any component for any reason, also known as revision for any reason. Survival estimates are provided when 40 devices are left still being followed. | 2 Years |
| To Compare the Survivorship Analysis Results Between Sigma RP and Sigma Fixed Treatment Groups in PCL Retaining Arm | Kaplan Meier survivorship analysis estimates the proportion of a population that will survive past a certain time avoiding a certain event. In this study, the event is removal of any component for any reason, also known as revision for any reason. Survival estimates are provided when 40 devices are left still being followed. | 2 Years |
| To Compare the Survivorship Analysis Results Between Sigma RP and Sigma Fixed Treatment Groups in PCL Sacrificing Arm | Kaplan Meier survivorship analysis estimates the proportion of a population that will survive past a certain time avoiding a certain event. In this study, the event is removal of any component for any reason, also known as revision for any reason. Survival estimates are provided when 40 devices are left still being followed. | 5 Years |
| To Compare the Percentage of Subjects With No Anterior Knee Pain Between Sigma RP and Sigma Fixed Bearing Treatment Groups With Patella Resurfacing in the PCL Sacrificing Arm | Anterior Knee Pain is assessed by the patient into 1 of 4 categories: None, Mild, Moderate, or Severe. The percentage of participants with no anterior knee pain is reported in the data table. | 2 Years |
| To Compare the Percentage of Subjects With No Anterior Knee Pain Between Sigma RP and Sigma Fixed Bearing Treatment Groups Without Patella Resurfacing in the PCL Sacrificing Arm | Anterior Knee Pain is assessed by the patient into 1 of 4 categories: None, Mild, Moderate, or Severe. The percentage of participants with no anterior knee pain is reported in the data table. | 2 Years |
| To Compare the Percentage of Subjects With No Anterior Knee Pain Between Sigma RP and Sigma Fixed Bearing Treatment Groups With Patella Resurfacing in the PCL Sacrificing Arm | Anterior Knee Pain is assessed by the patient into 1 of 4 categories: None, Mild, Moderate, or Severe. The percentage of participants with no anterior knee pain is reported in the data table. | 5 Years |
| To Compare the Percentage of Subjects With No Anterior Knee Pain Between Sigma RP and Sigma Fixed Bearing Treatment Groups Without Patella Resurfacing in the PCL Sacrificing Arm | Anterior Knee Pain is assessed by the patient into 1 of 4 categories: None, Mild, Moderate, or Severe. The percentage of participants with no anterior knee pain is reported in the data table. | 5 Years |
| To Compare the Percentage of Subjects With Good Quadriceps Strength Between Sigma RP and Sigma Fixed Bearing Treatment Groups With Patella Resurfacing in the PCL Sacrificing Arm | Quadriceps Strength is assessed by the patient into 1 of 3 categories: Good, Fair, or Poor. The percentage of participants with good quadriceps strength is reported in the data table. | 2 Years |
| To Compare the Percentage of Subjects With Good Quadriceps Strength Between Sigma RP and Sigma Fixed Bearing Treatment Groups Without Patella Resurfacing in the PCL Sacrificing Arm | Quadriceps Strength is assessed by the patient into 1 of 3 categories: Good, Fair, or Poor. The percentage of participants with good quadriceps strength is reported in the data table. | 2 Years |
| To Compare the Percentage of Subjects With Good Quadriceps Strength Between Sigma RP and Sigma Fixed Bearing Treatment Groups With Patella Resurfacing in the PCL Sacrificing Arm | Quadriceps Strength is assessed by the patient into 1 of 3 categories: Good, Fair, or Poor. The percentage of participants with good quadriceps strength is reported in the data table. | 5 Years |
| To Compare the Percentage of Subjects With Good Quadriceps Strength Between Sigma RP and Sigma Fixed Bearing Treatment Groups Without Patella Resurfacing in the PCL Sacrificing Arm | Quadriceps Strength is assessed by the patient into 1 of 3 categories: Good, Fair, or Poor. The percentage of participants with good quadriceps strength is reported in the data table. | 5 Years |
| To Compare the Change in Patella Score From Pre-op to 2 Years Between Sigma RP and Sigma Fixed Bearing Treatment Groups With Patella Resurfacing in the PCL Sacrificing Arm | The Patella Score is completed by the clinicians and assesses the anterior knee pain, quadriceps strength, ability to rise from a chair and stair climbing. The Patella Score ranges from 3 to 30 points with higher scores indicating better functionality and lower scores indicating poorer functionality. | Change from pre-op to 2 years |
| To Compare the Change in Patella Score From Pre-op to 2 Years Between Sigma RP and Sigma Fixed Bearing Treatment Groups Without Patella Resurfacing in the PCL Sacrificing Arm | The Patella Score is completed by the clinicians and assesses the anterior knee pain, quadriceps strength, ability to rise from a chair and stair climbing. The Patella Score ranges from 3 to 30 points with higher scores indicating better functionality and lower scores indicating poorer functionality. | Change from pre-op to 2 years |
| To Compare the Change in Patella Score From Pre-op to 5 Years Between Sigma RP and Sigma Fixed Bearing Treatment Groups With Patella Resurfacing in the PCL Sacrificing Arm | The Patella Score is completed by the clinicians and assesses the anterior knee pain, quadriceps strength, ability to rise from a chair and stair climbing. The Patella Score ranges from 3 to 30 points with higher scores indicating better functionality and lower scores indicating poorer functionality. | Change from pre-op to 5 years |
| To Compare the Change in Patella Score From Pre-op to 5 Years Between Sigma RP and Sigma Fixed Bearing Treatment Groups Without Patella Resurfacing in the PCL Sacrificing Arm | The Patella Score is completed by the clinicians and assesses the anterior knee pain, quadriceps strength, ability to rise from a chair and stair climbing. The Patella Score ranges from 3 to 30 points with higher scores indicating better functionality and lower scores indicating poorer functionality. | Change from pre-op to 5 years |
| Glasgow |
| United Kingdom |
| Northampton General Hospital | Northampton | United Kingdom |
| Nottingham City Hospital | Nottingham | NG5 1LB | United Kingdom |
| Withdrawal by Subject |
|
| Revision |
|
| Lost to Follow-up |
|
| Unsurfaced to Resurfaced Patella |
|
| Does not wish to Continue in Study |
|
| Other |
|
| Mis-Randomized |
|
PFC Sigma Rotating Platform Total Knee System with PCL Sacrificed
P.F.C Sigma RP Mobile Bearing knee system: Orthopaedic implant for total knee replacement
| BG002 | PFC Sigma Fixed Bearing PCL Retained | PFC Sigma Fixed Bearing Total Knee System with PCL Retained P.F.C Sigma Fixed Bearing total knee system: Orthopaedic implant for total knee replacement |
| BG003 | PFC Sigma RP PCL Retained | PFC Sigma Rotating Platform Total Knee System with PCL Retained P.F.C Sigma RP Mobile Bearing knee system: Orthopaedic implant for total knee replacement |
| BG004 | Total | Total of all reporting groups |
| years |
|
| Sex: Female, Male | Count of Participants | Participants |
|
| Region of Enrollment | Number | participants |
|
| OG001 | PFC Sigma RP PCL Sacrificed | PFC Sigma Rotating Platform Total Knee System with PCL Sacrificed P.F.C Sigma RP Mobile Bearing knee system: Orthopaedic implant for total knee replacement |
|
|
| Primary | To Compare Range of Motion Between Sigma RP and Sigma Fixed Treatment Groups in PCL Retaining Arm | Range of motion is knee flexion (how far the patient can bend their knee) minus knee extension (how far the patient can straighten their knee). The result of this subtraction is the range of motion (bending and straightening) for that knee. | Due to consent withdrawals, deaths, lost to follow up, revisions, subjects whose patella were resurfaced, mis-randomized, those who did not wish to continue in the study, and incomplete or unavailable assessments, 158 subjects in the PFC Sigma Fixed Bearing and 155 subjects in the PFC Sigma RP Treatment Groups were available for this outcome. | Posted | Mean | Standard Deviation | degrees | 1 year |
|
|
|
| Primary | To Compare the Change in Range of Motion From Pre-op to 1 Year Between Sigma RP and Sigma Fixed Treatment Groups in PCL Sacrificing Arm | Range of motion is knee flexion (how far the patient can bend their knee) minus knee extension (how far the patient can straighten their knee). The result of this subtraction is the range of motion (bending and straightening) for that knee. | Due to consent withdrawals, deaths, lost to follow up, revisions, subjects whose patella were resurfaced, mis-randomized, those who did not wish to continue in the study, and incomplete or unavailable assessments, 164 subjects in the PFC Sigma Fixed Bearing and 164 subjects in the PFC Sigma RP Treatment Groups were available for this outcome. | Posted | Mean | Standard Deviation | degrees | Change from pre-op to 1 year |
|
|
|
| Primary | To Compare the Change in Range of Motion From Pre-op to 1 Year Between Sigma RP and Sigma Fixed Treatment Groups in PCL Retaining Arm | Range of motion is knee flexion (how far the patient can bend their knee) minus knee extension (how far the patient can straighten their knee). The result of this subtraction is the range of motion (bending and straightening) for that knee. | Due to consent withdrawals, deaths, lost to follow up, revisions, subjects whose patella were resurfaced, mis-randomized, those who did not wish to continue in the study, and incomplete or unavailable assessments, 158 subjects in the PFC Sigma Fixed Bearing and 153 subjects in the PFC Sigma RP Treatment Groups were available for this outcome. | Posted | Mean | Standard Deviation | degrees | Change from pre-op to 1 year |
|
|
|
| Secondary | To Compare the Change in Range of Motion From Pre-op to 2 Years Between Sigma RP and Sigma Fixed Treatment Groups in PCL Sacrificing Arm | Range of motion is knee flexion (how far the patient can bend their knee) minus knee extension (how far the patient can straighten their knee). The result of this subtraction is the range of motion (bending and straightening) for that knee. | Due to consent withdrawals, deaths, lost to follow up, revisions, subjects whose patella were resurfaced, mis-randomized, those who did not wish to continue in the study, and incomplete or unavailable assessments, 156 subjects in the PFC Sigma Fixed Bearing and 148 subjects in the PFC Sigma RP Treatment Groups were available for this outcome. | Posted | Mean | Standard Deviation | degrees | Change from pre-op to 2 years |
|
|
|
| Secondary | To Compare the Change in Range of Motion From Pre-op to 2 Years Between Sigma RP and Sigma Fixed Treatment Groups in PCL Retaining Arm | Range of motion is knee flexion (how far the patient can bend their knee) minus knee extension (how far the patient can straighten their knee). The result of this subtraction is the range of motion (bending and straightening) for that knee. | Due to consent withdrawals, deaths, lost to follow up, revisions, subjects whose patella were resurfaced, mis-randomized, those who did not wish to continue in the study, and incomplete or unavailable assessments, 170 subjects in the PFC Sigma Fixed Bearing and 161 subjects in the PFC Sigma RP Treatment Groups were available for this outcome. | Posted | Mean | Standard Deviation | degrees | Change from pre-op to 2 years |
|
|
|
| Secondary | To Compare the Change in Range of Motion From Pre-op to 5 Years Between Sigma RP and Sigma Fixed Treatment Groups in PCL Sacrificing Arm | Range of motion is knee flexion (how far the patient can bend their knee) minus knee extension (how far the patient can straighten their knee). The result of this subtraction is the range of motion (bending and straightening) for that knee. | Due to consent withdrawals, deaths, lost to follow up, revisions, subjects whose patella were resurfaced, mis-randomized, those who did not wish to continue in the study, and incomplete or unavailable assessments, 123 subjects in the PFC Sigma Fixed Bearing and 124 subjects in the PFC Sigma RP Treatment Groups were available for this outcome. | Posted | Mean | Standard Deviation | degrees | Change from pre-op to 5 years |
|
|
|
| Secondary | To Compare the Change in Oxford Knee Score From Pre-op to 2 Years Between Sigma RP and Sigma Fixed Treatment Groups in PCL Retaining Arm | The Oxford Knee Score (OKS) is a 12 to 60 point patient reported outcome (PRO) score (where 12 indicates the best outcome) that evaluates the affected knee. The total score is composed of Pain and Function. | Due to consent withdrawals, deaths, lost to follow up, revisions, subjects whose patella were resurfaced, mis-randomized, those who did not wish to continue in the study, and incomplete or unavailable assessments, 145 subjects in the PFC Sigma Fixed Bearing and 138 subjects in the PFC Sigma RP Treatment Groups were available for this outcome. | Posted | Mean | Standard Deviation | units on a scale | Change from pre-op to 2 years |
|
|
|
| Secondary | To Compare the Change in Oxford Knee Score From Pre-op to 2 Years Between Sigma RP and Sigma Fixed Treatment Groups in PCL Sacrificing Arm | The Oxford Knee Score (OKS) is a 12 to 60 point patient reported outcome (PRO) score (where 12 indicates the best outcome) that evaluates the affected knee. The total score is composed of Pain and Function. | Due to consent withdrawals, deaths, lost to follow up, revisions, subjects whose patella were resurfaced, mis-randomized, those who did not wish to continue in the study, and incomplete or unavailable assessments, 134 subjects in the PFC Sigma Fixed Bearing and 118 subjects in the PFC Sigma RP Treatment Groups were available for this outcome. | Posted | Mean | Standard Deviation | units on a scale | Change from pre-op to 2 years |
|
|
|
| Secondary | To Compare the Change in Oxford Knee Score From Pre-op to 5 Years Between Sigma RP and Sigma Fixed Treatment Groups in PCL Sacrificing Arm | The Oxford Knee Score (OKS) is a 12 to 60 point patient reported outcome (PRO) score (where 12 indicates the best outcome) that evaluates the affected knee. The total score is composed of Pain and Function. | Due to consent withdrawals, deaths, lost to follow up, revisions, subjects whose patella were resurfaced, mis-randomized, those who did not wish to continue in the study, and incomplete or unavailable assessments, 114 subjects in the PFC Sigma Fixed Bearing and 111 subjects in the PFC Sigma RP Treatment Groups were available for this outcome. | Posted | Mean | Standard Deviation | units on a scale | Change from pre-op to 5 years |
|
|
|
| Secondary | To Compare the Change in American Knee Society Knee Score From Pre-op to 2 Years Between Sigma RP and Sigma Fixed Treatment Groups in PCL Sacrificing Arm | American Knee Society (AKS) knee score is a 0-100 point score (where 100 indicates excellent knee condition) that evaluates the affected knee. The knee score is composed of Pain, Range of Motion, and Stability. | Due to consent withdrawals, deaths, lost to follow up, revisions, subjects whose patella were resurfaced, mis-randomized, those who did not wish to continue in the study, and incomplete or unavailable assessments, 154 subjects in the PFC Sigma Fixed Bearing and 143 subjects in the PFC Sigma RP Treatment Groups were available for this outcome. | Posted | Mean | Standard Deviation | units on a scale | Change from pre-op to 2 years |
|
|
|
| Secondary | To Compare the Change in American Knee Society Knee Score From Pre-op to 2 Years Between Sigma RP and Sigma Fixed Treatment Groups in PCL Retaining Arm | American Knee Society (AKS) knee score is a 0-100 point score (where 100 indicates excellent knee condition) that evaluates the affected knee. The knee score is composed of Pain, Range of Motion, and Stability. | Due to consent withdrawals, deaths, lost to follow up, revisions, subjects whose patella were resurfaced, mis-randomized, those who did not wish to continue in the study, and incomplete or unavailable assessments, 152 subjects in the PFC Sigma Fixed Bearing and 143 subjects in the PFC Sigma RP Treatment Groups were available for this outcome. | Posted | Mean | Standard Deviation | units on a scale | Change from pre-op to 2 years |
|
|
|
| Secondary | To Compare the Change in American Knee Society Knee Score From Pre-op to 5 Years Between Sigma RP and Sigma Fixed Treatment Groups in PCL Sacrificing Arm | American Knee Society (AKS) knee score is a 0-100 point score (where 100 indicates excellent knee condition) that evaluates the affected knee. The knee score is composed of Pain, Range of Motion, and Stability. | Due to consent withdrawals, deaths, lost to follow up, revisions, subjects whose patella were resurfaced, mis-randomized, those who did not wish to continue in the study, and incomplete or unavailable assessments, 122 subjects in the PFC Sigma Fixed Bearing and 120 subjects in the PFC Sigma RP Treatment Groups were available for this outcome. | Posted | Mean | Standard Deviation | units on a scale | Change from pre-op to 5 years |
|
|
|
| Secondary | To Compare the Change in American Knee Society Function Score From Pre-op to 2 Years Between Sigma RP and Sigma Fixed Treatment Groups in PCL Sacrificing Arm | American Knee Society (AKS) function score is a 0-100 point score (where 100 indicates excellent knee function) that evaluates the affected knee. The function score is composed of walking and stair climbing ability. | Due to consent withdrawals, deaths, lost to follow up, revisions, subjects whose patella were resurfaced, mis-randomized, those who did not wish to continue in the study, and incomplete or unavailable assessments, 155 subjects in the PFC Sigma Fixed Bearing and 144 subjects in the PFC Sigma RP Treatment Groups were available for this outcome. | Posted | Mean | Standard Deviation | units on a scale | Change from pre-op to 2 years |
|
|
|
| Secondary | To Compare the Change in American Knee Society Function Score From Pre-op to 2 Years Between Sigma RP and Sigma Fixed Treatment Groups in PCL Retaining Arm | American Knee Society (AKS) function score is a 0-100 point score (where 100 indicates excellent knee function) that evaluates the affected knee. The function score is composed of walking and stair climbing ability. | Due to consent withdrawals, deaths, lost to follow up, revisions, subjects whose patella were resurfaced, mis-randomized, those who did not wish to continue in the study, and incomplete or unavailable assessments, 154 subjects in the PFC Sigma Fixed Bearing and 146 subjects in the PFC Sigma RP Treatment Groups were available for this outcome. | Posted | Mean | Standard Deviation | units on a scale | Change from pre-op to 2 years |
|
|
|
| Secondary | To Compare the Change in American Knee Society Function Score From Pre-op to 5 Years Between Sigma RP and Sigma Fixed Treatment Groups in PCL Sacrificing Arm | American Knee Society (AKS) function score is a 0-100 point score (where 100 indicates excellent knee function) that evaluates the affected knee. The function score is composed of walking and stair climbing ability. | Due to consent withdrawals, deaths, lost to follow up, revisions, subjects whose patella were resurfaced, mis-randomized, those who did not wish to continue in the study, and incomplete or unavailable assessments, 124 subjects in the PFC Sigma Fixed Bearing and 125 subjects in the PFC Sigma RP Treatment Groups were available for this outcome. | Posted | Mean | Standard Deviation | units on a scale | Change from pre-op to 5 years |
|
|
|
| Secondary | To Compare the Percentage of Subjects With No Anterior Knee Pain Between Sigma RP and Sigma Fixed Treatment Groups in PCL Sacrificing Arm | Anterior Knee Pain is assessed by the patient into 1 of 4 categories: None, Mild, Moderate, or Severe. The percentage of participants with no anterior knee pain is reported in the data table. | Due to consent withdrawals, deaths, lost to follow up, revisions, subjects whose patella were resurfaced, mis-randomized, those who did not wish to continue in the study, and incomplete or unavailable assessments, 176 subjects in the PFC Sigma Fixed Bearing and 176 subjects in the PFC Sigma RP Treatment Groups were available for this outcome. | Posted | Number | percentage of participants | 2 years |
|
|
|
| Secondary | To Compare the Percentage of Subjects With No Anterior Knee Pain Between Sigma RP and Sigma Fixed Treatment Groups in PCL Retaining Arm | Anterior Knee Pain is assessed by the patient into 1 of 4 categories: None, Mild, Moderate, or Severe. The percentage of participants with no anterior knee pain is reported in the data table. | Due to consent withdrawals, deaths, lost to follow up, revisions, subjects whose patella were resurfaced, mis-randomized, those who did not wish to continue in the study, and incomplete or unavailable assessments, 170 subjects in the PFC Sigma Fixed Bearing and 161 subjects in the PFC Sigma RP Treatment Groups were available for this outcome. | Posted | Number | percentage of participants | 2 years |
|
|
|
| Secondary | To Compare the Percentage of Subjects With No Anterior Knee Pain Between Sigma RP and Sigma Fixed Treatment Groups in PCL Sacrificing Arm | Anterior Knee Pain is assessed by the patient into 1 of 4 categories: None, Mild, Moderate, or Severe. The percentage of participants with no anterior knee pain is reported in the data table. | Due to consent withdrawals, deaths, lost to follow up, revisions, subjects whose patella were resurfaced, mis-randomized, those who did not wish to continue in the study, and incomplete or unavailable assessments, 176 subjects in the PFC Sigma Fixed Bearing and 176 subjects in the PFC Sigma RP Treatment Groups were available for this outcome. | Posted | Number | percentage of participants | 5 Years |
|
|
|
| Secondary | To Compare the Percentage of Subjects With Good Quadriceps Strength Between Sigma RP and Sigma Fixed Treatment Groups in PCL Sacrificing Arm | Quadriceps Strength is assessed by the patient into 1 of 3 categories: Good, Fair, or Poor. The percentage of participants with good quadriceps strength is reported in the data table. | Due to consent withdrawals, deaths, lost to follow up, revisions, subjects whose patella were resurfaced, mis-randomized, those who did not wish to continue in the study, and incomplete or unavailable assessments, 176 subjects in the PFC Sigma Fixed Bearing and 176 subjects in the PFC Sigma RP Treatment Groups were available for this outcome. | Posted | Number | percentage of participants | 2 years |
|
|
|
| Secondary | To Compare the Percentage of Subjects With Good Quadriceps Strength Between Sigma RP and Sigma Fixed Treatment Groups in PCL Retaining Arm | Quadriceps Strength is assessed by the patient into 1 of 3 categories: Good, Fair, or Poor. The percentage of participants with good quadriceps strength is reported in the data table. | Due to consent withdrawals, deaths, lost to follow up, revisions, subjects whose patella were resurfaced, mis-randomized, those who did not wish to continue in the study, and incomplete or unavailable assessments, 170 subjects in the PFC Sigma Fixed Bearing and 161 subjects in the PFC Sigma RP Treatment Groups were available for this outcome. | Posted | Number | percentage of participants | 2 years |
|
|
|
| Secondary | To Compare the Percentage of Subjects With Good Quadriceps Strength Between Sigma RP and Sigma Fixed Treatment Groups in PCL Sacrificing Arm | Quadriceps Strength is assessed by the patient into 1 of 3 categories: Good, Fair, or Poor. The percentage of participants with good quadriceps strength is reported in the data table. | Due to consent withdrawals, deaths, lost to follow up, revisions, subjects whose patella were resurfaced, mis-randomized, those who did not wish to continue in the study, and incomplete or unavailable assessments, 176 subjects in the PFC Sigma Fixed Bearing and 176 subjects in the PFC Sigma RP Treatment Groups were available for this outcome. | Posted | Number | percentage of participants | 5 Years |
|
|
|
| Secondary | To Compare the Change in SF-12 Physical Health Score From Pre-op to 2 Years Between Sigma RP and Sigma Fixed Treatment Groups in PCL Sacrificing Arm | The 12-Item Short Form Health Survey (SF-12) is a patient reported outcome survey that represents overall subjective health status by measuring eight health-related parameters (each scored from 0 [poor health] to 100 [better health]): body pain, general mental health, perception of general health, physical functioning, role limitations caused by mental condition, role limitations caused by a physical condition, social functioning, and vitality. The survey is converted into 2 summary measures that are scored from 0 to 100 (where 100 indicates the highest level of health) - the Physical Component Score (PCS-12) and Mental Component Score (MCS-12). | Due to consent withdrawals, deaths, lost to follow up, revisions, subjects whose patella were resurfaced, mis-randomized, those who did not wish to continue in the study, and incomplete or unavailable assessments, 130 subjects in the PFC Sigma Fixed Bearing and 118 subjects in the PFC Sigma RP Treatment Groups were available for this outcome. | Posted | Mean | Standard Deviation | units on a scale | Change from pre-op to 2 years |
|
|
|
| Secondary | To Compare the Change in SF-12 Physical Health Score From Pre-op to 2 Years Between Sigma RP and Sigma Fixed Treatment Groups in PCL Retaining Arm | The 12-Item Short Form Health Survey (SF-12) is a patient reported outcome survey that represents overall subjective health status by measuring eight health-related parameters (each scored from 0 [poor health] to 100 [better health]): body pain, general mental health, perception of general health, physical functioning, role limitations caused by mental condition, role limitations caused by a physical condition, social functioning, and vitality. The survey is converted into 2 summary measures that are scored from 0 to 100 (where 100 indicates the highest level of health) - the Physical Component Score (PCS-12) and Mental Component Score (MCS-12). | Due to consent withdrawals, deaths, lost to follow up, revisions, subjects whose patella were resurfaced, mis-randomized, those who did not wish to continue in the study, and incomplete or unavailable assessments, 139 subjects in the PFC Sigma Fixed Bearing and 130 subjects in the PFC Sigma RP Treatment Groups were available for this outcome. | Posted | Mean | Standard Deviation | units on a scale | Change from pre-op to 2 years |
|
|
|
| Secondary | To Compare the Change in SF-12 Physical Health Score From Pre-op to 5 Years Between Sigma RP and Sigma Fixed Treatment Groups in PCL Sacrificing Arm | The 12-Item Short Form Health Survey (SF-12) is a patient reported outcome survey that represents overall subjective health status by measuring eight health-related parameters (each scored from 0 [poor health] to 100 [better health]): body pain, general mental health, perception of general health, physical functioning, role limitations caused by mental condition, role limitations caused by a physical condition, social functioning, and vitality. The survey is converted into 2 summary measures that are scored from 0 to 100 (where 100 indicates the highest level of health) - the Physical Component Score (PCS-12) and Mental Component Score (MCS-12). | Due to consent withdrawals, deaths, lost to follow up, revisions, subjects whose patella were resurfaced, mis-randomized, those who did not wish to continue in the study, and incomplete or unavailable assessments, 107 subjects in the PFC Sigma Fixed Bearing and 109 subjects in the PFC Sigma RP Treatment Groups were available for this outcome. | Posted | Mean | Standard Deviation | units on a scale | Change from pre-op to 5 years |
|
|
|
| Secondary | To Compare the Change in SF-12 Mental Health Score From Pre-op to 2 Years Between Sigma RP and Sigma Fixed Treatment Groups in PCL Sacrificing Arm | The 12-Item Short Form Health Survey (SF-12) is a patient reported outcome survey that represents overall subjective health status by measuring eight health-related parameters (each scored from 0 [poor health] to 100 [better health]): body pain, general mental health, perception of general health, physical functioning, role limitations caused by mental condition, role limitations caused by a physical condition, social functioning, and vitality. The survey is converted into 2 summary measures that are scored from 0 to 100 (where 100 indicates the highest level of health) - the Physical Component Score (PCS-12) and Mental Component Score (MCS-12). | Due to consent withdrawals, deaths, lost to follow up, revisions, subjects whose patella were resurfaced, mis-randomized, those who did not wish to continue in the study, and incomplete or unavailable assessments, 130 subjects in the PFC Sigma Fixed Bearing and 118 subjects in the PFC Sigma RP Treatment Groups were available for this outcome. | Posted | Mean | Standard Deviation | units on a scale | Change from pre-op to 2 years |
|
|
|
| Secondary | To Compare the Change in SF-12 Mental Health Score From Pre-op to 2 Years Between Sigma RP and Sigma Fixed Treatment Groups in PCL Retaining Arm | The 12-Item Short Form Health Survey (SF-12) is a patient reported outcome survey that represents overall subjective health status by measuring eight health-related parameters (each scored from 0 [poor health] to 100 [better health]): body pain, general mental health, perception of general health, physical functioning, role limitations caused by mental condition, role limitations caused by a physical condition, social functioning, and vitality. The survey is converted into 2 summary measures that are scored from 0 to 100 (where 100 indicates the highest level of health) - the Physical Component Score (PCS-12) and Mental Component Score (MCS-12). | Due to consent withdrawals, deaths, lost to follow up, revisions, subjects whose patella were resurfaced, mis-randomized, those who did not wish to continue in the study, and incomplete or unavailable assessments, 139 subjects in the PFC Sigma Fixed Bearing and 130 subjects in the PFC Sigma RP Treatment Groups were available for this outcome. | Posted | Mean | Standard Deviation | units on a scale | Change from pre-op to 2 years |
|
|
|
| Secondary | To Compare the Change in SF-12 Mental Health Score From Pre-op to 5 Years Between Sigma RP and Sigma Fixed Treatment Groups in PCL Sacrificing Arm | The 12-Item Short Form Health Survey (SF-12) is a patient reported outcome survey that represents overall subjective health status by measuring eight health-related parameters (each scored from 0 [poor health] to 100 [better health]): body pain, general mental health, perception of general health, physical functioning, role limitations caused by mental condition, role limitations caused by a physical condition, social functioning, and vitality. The survey is converted into 2 summary measures that are scored from 0 to 100 (where 100 indicates the highest level of health) - the Physical Component Score (PCS-12) and Mental Component Score (MCS-12). | Due to consent withdrawals, deaths, lost to follow up, revisions, subjects whose patella were resurfaced, mis-randomized, those who did not wish to continue in the study, and incomplete or unavailable assessments, 107 subjects in the PFC Sigma Fixed Bearing and 109 subjects in the PFC Sigma RP Treatment Groups were available for this outcome. | Posted | Mean | Standard Deviation | units on a scale | Change from pre-op to 5 years |
|
|
|
| Secondary | To Compare the Change in Patella Score From Pre-op to 2 Years Between Sigma RP and Sigma Fixed Treatment Groups in PCL Sacrificing Arm | The Patella Score is completed by the clinicians and assesses the anterior knee pain, quadriceps strength, ability to rise from a chair and stair climbing. The Patella Score ranges from 3 to 30 points with higher scores indicating better functionality and lower scores indicating poorer functionality. | Due to consent withdrawals, deaths, lost to follow up, revisions, subjects whose patella were resurfaced, mis-randomized, those who did not wish to continue in the study, and incomplete or unavailable assessments, 152 subjects in the PFC Sigma Fixed Bearing and 141 subjects in the PFC Sigma RP Treatment Groups were available for this outcome. | Posted | Mean | Standard Deviation | units on a scale | Change from pre-op to 2 years |
|
|
|
| Secondary | To Compare the Change in Patella Score From Pre-op to 2 Years Between Sigma RP and Sigma Fixed Treatment Groups in PCL Retaining Arm | The Patella Score is completed by the clinicians and assesses the anterior knee pain, quadriceps strength, ability to rise from a chair and stair climbing. The Patella Score ranges from 3 to 30 points with higher scores indicating better functionality and lower scores indicating poorer functionality. | Due to consent withdrawals, deaths, lost to follow up, revisions, subjects whose patella were resurfaced, mis-randomized, those who did not wish to continue in the study, and incomplete or unavailable assessments, 153 subjects in the PFC Sigma Fixed Bearing and 144 subjects in the PFC Sigma RP Treatment Groups were available for this outcome. | Posted | Mean | Standard Deviation | units on a scale | Change from pre-op to 2 years |
|
|
|
| Secondary | To Compare the Change in Patella Score From Pre-op to 5 Years Between Sigma RP and Sigma Fixed Treatment Groups in PCL Sacrificing Arm | The Patella Score is completed by the clinicians and assesses the anterior knee pain, quadriceps strength, ability to rise from a chair and stair climbing. The Patella Score ranges from 3 to 30 points with higher scores indicating better functionality and lower scores indicating poorer functionality. | Due to consent withdrawals, deaths, lost to follow up, revisions, subjects whose patella were resurfaced, mis-randomized, those who did not wish to continue in the study, and incomplete or unavailable assessments, 122 subjects in the PFC Sigma Fixed Bearing and 122 subjects in the PFC Sigma RP Treatment Groups were available for this outcome. | Posted | Mean | Standard Deviation | units on a scale | Change from pre-op to 5 years |
|
|
|
| Secondary | To Compare the Percentage of Subjects With at Least 1 Tibial Radiolucency Between Sigma RP and Sigma Fixed Treatment Groups in PCL Sacrificing Arm | Tibial Radiolucency observes a radiolucent line (of 0.5mm or wider) on the radiograph around the tibial component. | Due to consent withdrawals, deaths, lost to follow up, revisions, subjects whose patella were resurfaced, mis-randomized, those who did not wish to continue in the study, and incomplete or unavailable assessments, 176 subjects in the PFC Sigma Fixed Bearing and 176 subjects in the PFC Sigma RP Treatment Groups were available for this outcome. | Posted | Number | percentage of participants | 2 years |
|
|
|
| Secondary | To Compare the Percentage of Subjects With at Least 1 Tibial Radiolucency Between Sigma RP and Sigma Fixed Treatment Groups in PCL Retaining Arm | Tibial Radiolucency observes a radiolucent line (of 0.5mm or wider) on the radiograph around the tibial component. | Due to consent withdrawals, deaths, lost to follow up, revisions, subjects whose patella were resurfaced, mis-randomized, those who did not wish to continue in the study, and incomplete or unavailable assessments, 170 subjects in the PFC Sigma Fixed Bearing and 161 subjects in the PFC Sigma RP Treatment Groups were available for this outcome. | Posted | Number | percentage of participants | 2 years |
|
|
|
| Secondary | To Compare the Percentage of Subjects With at Least 1 Tibial Radiolucency Between Sigma RP and Sigma Fixed Treatment Groups in PCL Sacrificing Arm | Tibial Radiolucency observes a radiolucent line (of 0.5mm or wider) on the radiograph around the tibial component. | Due to consent withdrawals, deaths, lost to follow up, revisions, subjects whose patella were resurfaced, mis-randomized, those who did not wish to continue in the study, and incomplete or unavailable assessments, 176 subjects in the PFC Sigma Fixed Bearing and 176 subjects in the PFC Sigma RP Treatment Groups were available for this outcome. | Posted | Number | percentage of participants | 5 Years |
|
|
|
| Secondary | To Compare the Percentage of Subjects With Lateral Release Between Sigma RP and Sigma Fixed Treatment Groups in PCL Sacrificing Arm | Lateral release is a surgical procedure to release tight capsular structures (lateral retinaculum) on the outside of the kneecap (patella). It is performed during knee surgery and allows the kneecap to move smoothly in the center of the knee. Rate information was collected at time of study surgery. | Due to consent withdrawals, deaths, lost to follow up, revisions, subjects whose patella were resurfaced, mis-randomized, those who did not wish to continue in the study, and incomplete or unavailable assessments, 176 subjects in the PFC Sigma Fixed Bearing and 176 subjects in the PFC Sigma RP Treatment Groups were available for this outcome. | Posted | Number | percentage of participants | Operative |
|
|
|
| Secondary | To Compare the Percentage of Subjects With Lateral Release Between Sigma RP and Sigma Fixed Treatment Groups in PCL Retaining Arm | Lateral release is a surgical procedure to release tight capsular structures (lateral retinaculum) on the outside of the kneecap (patella). It is performed during knee surgery and allows the kneecap to move smoothly in the center of the knee. Rate information was collected at time of study surgery. | Due to consent withdrawals, deaths, lost to follow up, revisions, subjects whose patella were resurfaced, mis-randomized, those who did not wish to continue in the study, and incomplete or unavailable assessments, 170 subjects in the PFC Sigma Fixed Bearing and 161 subjects in the PFC Sigma RP Treatment Groups were available for this outcome. | Posted | Number | percentage of participants | Operative |
|
|
|
| Secondary | To Compare the Survivorship Analysis Results Between Sigma RP and Sigma Fixed Treatment Groups in PCL Sacrificing Arm | Kaplan Meier survivorship analysis estimates the proportion of a population that will survive past a certain time avoiding a certain event. In this study, the event is removal of any component for any reason, also known as revision for any reason. Survival estimates are provided when 40 devices are left still being followed. | Due to consent withdrawals, deaths, lost to follow up, revisions, subjects whose patella were resurfaced, mis-randomized, those who did not wish to continue in the study, and incomplete or unavailable assessments, 176 subjects in the PFC Sigma Fixed Bearing and 176 subjects in the PFC Sigma RP Treatment Groups were available for this outcome. | Posted | Number | 95% Confidence Interval | percentage of participants | 2 Years |
|
|
|
| Secondary | To Compare the Survivorship Analysis Results Between Sigma RP and Sigma Fixed Treatment Groups in PCL Retaining Arm | Kaplan Meier survivorship analysis estimates the proportion of a population that will survive past a certain time avoiding a certain event. In this study, the event is removal of any component for any reason, also known as revision for any reason. Survival estimates are provided when 40 devices are left still being followed. | Due to consent withdrawals, deaths, lost to follow up, revisions, subjects whose patella were resurfaced, mis-randomized, those who did not wish to continue in the study, and incomplete or unavailable assessments, 170 subjects in the PFC Sigma Fixed Bearing and 161 subjects in the PFC Sigma RP Treatment Groups were available for this outcome. | Posted | Number | 95% Confidence Interval | percentage of participants | 2 Years |
|
|
|
| Secondary | To Compare the Survivorship Analysis Results Between Sigma RP and Sigma Fixed Treatment Groups in PCL Sacrificing Arm | Kaplan Meier survivorship analysis estimates the proportion of a population that will survive past a certain time avoiding a certain event. In this study, the event is removal of any component for any reason, also known as revision for any reason. Survival estimates are provided when 40 devices are left still being followed. | Due to consent withdrawals, deaths, lost to follow up, revisions, subjects whose patella were resurfaced, mis-randomized, those who did not wish to continue in the study, and incomplete or unavailable assessments, 176 subjects in the PFC Sigma Fixed Bearing and 176 subjects in the PFC Sigma RP Treatment Groups were available for this outcome. | Posted | Number | 95% Confidence Interval | percentage of participants | 5 Years |
|
|
|
| Secondary | To Compare the Percentage of Subjects With No Anterior Knee Pain Between Sigma RP and Sigma Fixed Bearing Treatment Groups With Patella Resurfacing in the PCL Sacrificing Arm | Anterior Knee Pain is assessed by the patient into 1 of 4 categories: None, Mild, Moderate, or Severe. The percentage of participants with no anterior knee pain is reported in the data table. | Due to consent withdrawals, deaths, lost to follow up, revisions, subjects whose patella were resurfaced, mis-randomized, those who did not wish to continue in the study, and incomplete or unavailable assessments, 88 subjects in the PFC Sigma Fixed Bearing and 89 subjects in the PFC Sigma RP Treatment Groups were available for this outcome. | Posted | Number | percentage of participants | 2 Years |
|
|
|
| Secondary | To Compare the Percentage of Subjects With No Anterior Knee Pain Between Sigma RP and Sigma Fixed Bearing Treatment Groups Without Patella Resurfacing in the PCL Sacrificing Arm | Anterior Knee Pain is assessed by the patient into 1 of 4 categories: None, Mild, Moderate, or Severe. The percentage of participants with no anterior knee pain is reported in the data table. | Due to consent withdrawals, deaths, lost to follow up, revisions, subjects whose patella were resurfaced, mis-randomized, those who did not wish to continue in the study, and incomplete or unavailable assessments, 88 subjects in the PFC Sigma Fixed Bearing and 87 subjects in the PFC Sigma RP Treatment Groups were available for this outcome. | Posted | Number | percentage of participants | 2 Years |
|
|
|
| Secondary | To Compare the Percentage of Subjects With No Anterior Knee Pain Between Sigma RP and Sigma Fixed Bearing Treatment Groups With Patella Resurfacing in the PCL Sacrificing Arm | Anterior Knee Pain is assessed by the patient into 1 of 4 categories: None, Mild, Moderate, or Severe. The percentage of participants with no anterior knee pain is reported in the data table. | Due to consent withdrawals, deaths, lost to follow up, revisions, subjects whose patella were resurfaced, mis-randomized, those who did not wish to continue in the study, and incomplete or unavailable assessments, 88 subjects in the PFC Sigma Fixed Bearing and 89 subjects in the PFC Sigma RP Treatment Groups were available for this outcome. | Posted | Number | percentage of participants | 5 Years |
|
|
|
| Secondary | To Compare the Percentage of Subjects With No Anterior Knee Pain Between Sigma RP and Sigma Fixed Bearing Treatment Groups Without Patella Resurfacing in the PCL Sacrificing Arm | Anterior Knee Pain is assessed by the patient into 1 of 4 categories: None, Mild, Moderate, or Severe. The percentage of participants with no anterior knee pain is reported in the data table. | Due to consent withdrawals, deaths, lost to follow up, revisions, subjects whose patella were resurfaced, mis-randomized, those who did not wish to continue in the study, and incomplete or unavailable assessments, 88 subjects in the PFC Sigma Fixed Bearing and 87 subjects in the PFC Sigma RP Treatment Groups were available for this outcome. | Posted | Number | percentage of participants | 5 Years |
|
|
|
| Secondary | To Compare the Percentage of Subjects With Good Quadriceps Strength Between Sigma RP and Sigma Fixed Bearing Treatment Groups With Patella Resurfacing in the PCL Sacrificing Arm | Quadriceps Strength is assessed by the patient into 1 of 3 categories: Good, Fair, or Poor. The percentage of participants with good quadriceps strength is reported in the data table. | Due to consent withdrawals, deaths, lost to follow up, revisions, subjects whose patella were resurfaced, mis-randomized, those who did not wish to continue in the study, and incomplete or unavailable assessments, 88 subjects in the PFC Sigma Fixed Bearing and 89 subjects in the PFC Sigma RP Treatment Groups were available for this outcome. | Posted | Number | percentage of participants | 2 Years |
|
|
|
| Secondary | To Compare the Percentage of Subjects With Good Quadriceps Strength Between Sigma RP and Sigma Fixed Bearing Treatment Groups Without Patella Resurfacing in the PCL Sacrificing Arm | Quadriceps Strength is assessed by the patient into 1 of 3 categories: Good, Fair, or Poor. The percentage of participants with good quadriceps strength is reported in the data table. | Due to consent withdrawals, deaths, lost to follow up, revisions, subjects whose patella were resurfaced, mis-randomized, those who did not wish to continue in the study, and incomplete or unavailable assessments, 88 subjects in the PFC Sigma Fixed Bearing and 87 subjects in the PFC Sigma RP Treatment Groups were available for this outcome. | Posted | Number | percentage of participants | 2 Years |
|
|
|
| Secondary | To Compare the Percentage of Subjects With Good Quadriceps Strength Between Sigma RP and Sigma Fixed Bearing Treatment Groups With Patella Resurfacing in the PCL Sacrificing Arm | Quadriceps Strength is assessed by the patient into 1 of 3 categories: Good, Fair, or Poor. The percentage of participants with good quadriceps strength is reported in the data table. | Due to consent withdrawals, deaths, lost to follow up, revisions, subjects whose patella were resurfaced, mis-randomized, those who did not wish to continue in the study, and incomplete or unavailable assessments, 88 subjects in the PFC Sigma Fixed Bearing and 89 subjects in the PFC Sigma RP Treatment Groups were available for this outcome. | Posted | Number | percentage of participants | 5 Years |
|
|
|
| Secondary | To Compare the Percentage of Subjects With Good Quadriceps Strength Between Sigma RP and Sigma Fixed Bearing Treatment Groups Without Patella Resurfacing in the PCL Sacrificing Arm | Quadriceps Strength is assessed by the patient into 1 of 3 categories: Good, Fair, or Poor. The percentage of participants with good quadriceps strength is reported in the data table. | Due to consent withdrawals, deaths, lost to follow up, revisions, subjects whose patella were resurfaced, mis-randomized, those who did not wish to continue in the study, and incomplete or unavailable assessments, 88 subjects in the PFC Sigma Fixed Bearing and 87 subjects in the PFC Sigma RP Treatment Groups were available for this outcome. | Posted | Number | percentage of participants | 5 Years |
|
|
|
| Secondary | To Compare the Change in Patella Score From Pre-op to 2 Years Between Sigma RP and Sigma Fixed Bearing Treatment Groups With Patella Resurfacing in the PCL Sacrificing Arm | The Patella Score is completed by the clinicians and assesses the anterior knee pain, quadriceps strength, ability to rise from a chair and stair climbing. The Patella Score ranges from 3 to 30 points with higher scores indicating better functionality and lower scores indicating poorer functionality. | Due to consent withdrawals, deaths, lost to follow up, revisions, subjects whose patella were resurfaced, mis-randomized, those who did not wish to continue in the study, and incomplete or unavailable assessments, 75 subjects in the PFC Sigma Fixed Bearing and 71 subjects in the PFC Sigma RP Treatment Groups were available for this outcome. | Posted | Mean | Standard Deviation | units on a scale | Change from pre-op to 2 years |
|
|
|
| Secondary | To Compare the Change in Patella Score From Pre-op to 2 Years Between Sigma RP and Sigma Fixed Bearing Treatment Groups Without Patella Resurfacing in the PCL Sacrificing Arm | The Patella Score is completed by the clinicians and assesses the anterior knee pain, quadriceps strength, ability to rise from a chair and stair climbing. The Patella Score ranges from 3 to 30 points with higher scores indicating better functionality and lower scores indicating poorer functionality. | Due to consent withdrawals, deaths, lost to follow up, revisions, subjects whose patella were resurfaced, mis-randomized, those who did not wish to continue in the study, and incomplete or unavailable assessments, 77 subjects in the PFC Sigma Fixed Bearing and 70 subjects in the PFC Sigma RP Treatment Groups were available for this outcome. | Posted | Mean | Standard Deviation | units on a scale | Change from pre-op to 2 years |
|
|
|
| Secondary | To Compare the Change in Patella Score From Pre-op to 5 Years Between Sigma RP and Sigma Fixed Bearing Treatment Groups With Patella Resurfacing in the PCL Sacrificing Arm | The Patella Score is completed by the clinicians and assesses the anterior knee pain, quadriceps strength, ability to rise from a chair and stair climbing. The Patella Score ranges from 3 to 30 points with higher scores indicating better functionality and lower scores indicating poorer functionality. | Due to consent withdrawals, deaths, lost to follow up, revisions, subjects whose patella were resurfaced, mis-randomized, those who did not wish to continue in the study, and incomplete or unavailable assessments, 60 subjects in the PFC Sigma Fixed Bearing and 62 subjects in the PFC Sigma RP Treatment Groups were available for this outcome. | Posted | Mean | Standard Deviation | units on a scale | Change from pre-op to 5 years |
|
|
|
| Secondary | To Compare the Change in Patella Score From Pre-op to 5 Years Between Sigma RP and Sigma Fixed Bearing Treatment Groups Without Patella Resurfacing in the PCL Sacrificing Arm | The Patella Score is completed by the clinicians and assesses the anterior knee pain, quadriceps strength, ability to rise from a chair and stair climbing. The Patella Score ranges from 3 to 30 points with higher scores indicating better functionality and lower scores indicating poorer functionality. | Due to consent withdrawals, deaths, lost to follow up, revisions, subjects whose patella were resurfaced, mis-randomized, those who did not wish to continue in the study, and incomplete or unavailable assessments, 62 subjects in the PFC Sigma Fixed Bearing and 60 subjects in the PFC Sigma RP Treatment Groups were available for this outcome. | Posted | Mean | Standard Deviation | units on a scale | Change from pre-op to 5 years |
|
|
|
| 111 |
| 193 |
| 0 |
| 193 |
| EG001 | PFC Sigma RP PCL Sacrificed | PFC Sigma Rotating Platform Total Knee System with PCL Sacrificed P.F.C Sigma RP Mobile Bearing knee system: Orthopaedic implant for total knee replacement | 107 | 196 | 0 | 196 |
| EG002 | PFC Sigma Fixed Bearing PCL Retained | PFC Sigma Fixed Bearing Total Knee System with PCL Retained P.F.C Sigma Fixed Bearing total knee system: Orthopaedic implant for total knee replacement | 110 | 170 | 0 | 170 |
| EG003 | PFC Sigma RP PCL Retained | PFC Sigma Rotating Platform Total Knee System with PCL Retained P.F.C Sigma RP Mobile Bearing knee system: Orthopaedic implant for total knee replacement | 96 | 161 | 0 | 161 |
| Iron deficiency anaemia | Blood and lymphatic system disorders | MedDRA 16.0 |
|
| Lymphocytosis | Blood and lymphatic system disorders | MedDRA 16.0 |
|
| Angina pectoris | Cardiac disorders | MedDRA 16.0 |
|
| Arrhythmia | Cardiac disorders | MedDRA 16.0 |
|
| Atrial fibrillation | Cardiac disorders | MedDRA 16.0 |
|
| Atrial flutter | Cardiac disorders | MedDRA 16.0 |
|
| Atrioventricular block | Cardiac disorders | MedDRA 16.0 |
|
| Atrioventricular block complete | Cardiac disorders | MedDRA 16.0 |
|
| Cardiac arrest | Cardiac disorders | MedDRA 16.0 |
|
| Cardiac failure | Cardiac disorders | MedDRA 16.0 |
|
| Cardiac disorders NEC | Cardiac disorders | MedDRA 16.0 |
|
| Cardiovascular disorder | Cardiac disorders | MedDRA 16.0 |
|
| Coronary artery disease | Cardiac disorders | MedDRA 16.0 |
|
| Heart enlarged | Cardiac disorders | MedDRA 16.0 |
|
| Mitral valve incompetence | Cardiac disorders | MedDRA 16.0 |
|
| Myocardial infarction | Cardiac disorders | MedDRA 16.0 |
|
| Tinnitus | Ear and labyrinth disorders | MedDRA 16.0 |
|
| Blindness | Eye disorders | MedDRA 16.0 |
|
| Cataract | Eye disorders | MedDRA 16.0 |
|
| Eye haemorrhage | Eye disorders | MedDRA 16.0 |
|
| Diplopia | Eye disorders | MedDRA 16.0 |
|
| Glaucoma | Eye disorders | MedDRA 16.0 |
|
| Macular degeneration | Eye disorders | MedDRA 16.0 |
|
| Macular hole | Eye disorders | MedDRA 16.0 |
|
| Uveitis | Eye disorders | MedDRA 16.0 |
|
| Visual acuity reduced | Eye disorders | MedDRA 16.0 |
|
| Abdominal discomfort | Gastrointestinal disorders | MedDRA 16.0 |
|
| Abdominal mass | Gastrointestinal disorders | MedDRA 16.0 |
|
| Abdominal pain | Gastrointestinal disorders | MedDRA 16.0 |
|
| Abdominal pain upper | Gastrointestinal disorders | MedDRA 16.0 |
|
| Anal haemorrhage | Gastrointestinal disorders | MedDRA 16.0 |
|
| Diarrhoea | Gastrointestinal disorders | MedDRA 16.0 |
|
| Ascites | Gastrointestinal disorders | MedDRA 16.0 |
|
| Dyspepsia | Gastrointestinal disorders | MedDRA 16.0 |
|
| Constipation | Gastrointestinal disorders | MedDRA 16.0 |
|
| Faeces discoloured | Gastrointestinal disorders | MedDRA 16.0 |
|
| Faecal incontinence | Gastrointestinal disorders | MedDRA 16.0 |
|
| Faeces pale | Gastrointestinal disorders | MedDRA 16.0 |
|
| Haemorrhoidal haemorrhage | Gastrointestinal disorders | MedDRA 16.0 |
|
| Frequent bowel movements | Gastrointestinal disorders | MedDRA 16.0 |
|
| Hiatal hernia | Gastrointestinal disorders | MedDRA 16.0 |
|
| Gastric ulcer | Gastrointestinal disorders | MedDRA 16.0 |
|
| Hiatus hernia | Gastrointestinal disorders | MedDRA 16.0 |
|
| Gastrointestinal haemorrhage | Gastrointestinal disorders | MedDRA 16.0 |
|
| Haematemesis | Gastrointestinal disorders | MedDRA 16.0 |
|
| Inguinal hernia | Gastrointestinal disorders | MedDRA 16.0 |
|
| Intestinal perforation | Gastrointestinal disorders | MedDRA 16.0 |
|
| Obstruction gastric | Gastrointestinal disorders | MedDRA 16.0 |
|
| Oral pain | Gastrointestinal disorders | MedDRA 16.0 |
|
| Pancreatitis acute | Gastrointestinal disorders | MedDRA 16.0 |
|
| Rectal haemorrhage | Gastrointestinal disorders | MedDRA 16.0 |
|
| Umbilical hernia | Gastrointestinal disorders | MedDRA 16.0 |
|
| Chest pain | General disorders | MedDRA 16.0 |
|
| Death- Unknown | General disorders | MedDRA 16.0 |
|
| Device connection issue | General disorders | MedDRA 16.0 |
|
| Device dislocation | General disorders | MedDRA 16.0 |
|
| Device extrusion | General disorders | MedDRA 16.0 |
|
| Gait disturbance | General disorders | MedDRA 16.0 |
|
| Malaise | General disorders | MedDRA 16.0 |
|
| Medical device complication | General disorders | MedDRA 16.0 |
|
| Pain | General disorders | MedDRA 16.0 |
|
| Spinal pain | General disorders | MedDRA 16.0 |
|
| Weight bearing difficulty | General disorders | MedDRA 16.0 |
|
| Chest discomfort | General disorders | MedDRA 16.0 |
|
| Device component issue | General disorders | MedDRA 16.0 |
|
| Device failure | General disorders | MedDRA 16.0 |
|
| Hernia | General disorders | MedDRA 16.0 |
|
| Oedema peripheral | General disorders | MedDRA 16.0 |
|
| Pain and discomfort NEC | General disorders | MedDRA 16.0 |
|
| Pyrexia | General disorders | MedDRA 16.0 |
|
| Surgical failure | General disorders | MedDRA 16.0 |
|
| Swelling | General disorders | MedDRA 16.0 |
|
| Cholelithiasis | Hepatobiliary disorders | MedDRA 16.0 |
|
| Biliary colic | Hepatobiliary disorders | MedDRA 16.0 |
|
| Cholecystitis | Hepatobiliary disorders | MedDRA 16.0 |
|
| Cholecystitis chronic | Hepatobiliary disorders | MedDRA 16.0 |
|
| Gallbladder perforation | Hepatobiliary disorders | MedDRA 16.0 |
|
| Jaundice | Hepatobiliary disorders | MedDRA 16.0 |
|
| Cellulitis | Infections and infestations | MedDRA 16.0 |
|
| Diverticulitis | Infections and infestations |
|
| Helicobacter gastritis | Infections and infestations |
|
| Implant site infection | Infections and infestations |
|
| Infection | Infections and infestations |
|
| Lower respiratory tract infection | Infections and infestations |
|
| Peritonitis | Infections and infestations |
|
| Pneumonia | Infections and infestations |
|
| Post procedural infection | Infections and infestations |
|
| Postoperative wound infection | Infections and infestations |
|
| Sepsis | Infections and infestations |
|
| Staphylococcal infection | Infections and infestations |
|
| Stitch abscess | Infections and infestations |
|
| Streptococcal infection | Infections and infestations |
|
| Tuberculosis | Infections and infestations |
|
| Urinary tract infection | Infections and infestations |
|
| Wound infection | Infections and infestations |
|
| Wound infection staphylococcal | Infections and infestations |
|
| Clostridium difficile colitis | Infections and infestations |
|
| Clostridium difficile infection | Infections and infestations |
|
| Ear infection staphylococcal | Infections and infestations |
|
| Gastroenteritis | Infections and infestations | MedDRA 16.0 |
|
| Helicobacter infection | Infections and infestations | MedDRA 16.0 |
|
| Infected dermal cyst | Infections and infestations | MedDRA 16.0 |
|
| Lobar pneumonia | Infections and infestations | MedDRA 16.0 |
|
| Lower respiratory tract infections NEC | Infections and infestations | MedDRA 16.0 |
|
| Osteomyelitis | Infections and infestations | MedDRA 16.0 |
|
| Pneumonia legionella | Infections and infestations | MedDRA 16.0 |
|
| Ankle fracture | Injury, poisoning and procedural complications | MedDRA 16.0 |
|
| Cervical vertebral fracture | Injury, poisoning and procedural complications | MedDRA 16.0 |
|
| Concussion | Injury, poisoning and procedural complications | MedDRA 16.0 |
|
| Ear injury | Injury, poisoning and procedural complications | MedDRA 16.0 |
|
| Facial bones fracture | Injury, poisoning and procedural complications | MedDRA 16.0 |
|
| Fall | Injury, poisoning and procedural complications | MedDRA 16.0 |
|
| Femoral neck fracture | Injury, poisoning and procedural complications | MedDRA 16.0 |
|
| Femur fracture | Injury, poisoning and procedural complications | MedDRA 16.0 |
|
| Glaucoma traumatic | Injury, poisoning and procedural complications | MedDRA 16.0 |
|
| Head injury | Injury, poisoning and procedural complications | MedDRA 16.0 |
|
| Hip fracture | Injury, poisoning and procedural complications | MedDRA 16.0 |
|
| Humerus fracture | Injury, poisoning and procedural complications | MedDRA 16.0 |
|
| Joint dislocation | Injury, poisoning and procedural complications | MedDRA 16.0 |
|
| Joint dislocation postoperative | Injury, poisoning and procedural complications | MedDRA 16.0 |
|
| Joint injury | Injury, poisoning and procedural complications | MedDRA 16.0 |
|
| Laceration | Injury, poisoning and procedural complications | MedDRA 16.0 |
|
| Ligament rupture | Injury, poisoning and procedural complications | MedDRA 16.0 |
|
| Limb injury | Injury, poisoning and procedural complications | MedDRA 16.0 |
|
| Lower limb fracture | Injury, poisoning and procedural complications | MedDRA 16.0 |
|
| Overdose | Injury, poisoning and procedural complications | MedDRA 16.0 |
|
| Pelvic fracture | Injury, poisoning and procedural complications | MedDRA 16.0 |
|
| Radius fracture | Injury, poisoning and procedural complications | MedDRA 16.0 |
|
| Subdural haemorrhage | Injury, poisoning and procedural complications | MedDRA 16.0 |
|
| Tibia fracture | Injury, poisoning and procedural complications | MedDRA 16.0 |
|
| Wound complication | Injury, poisoning and procedural complications | MedDRA 16.0 |
|
| Wound dehiscence | Injury, poisoning and procedural complications | MedDRA 16.0 |
|
| Wound secretion | Injury, poisoning and procedural complications | MedDRA 16.0 |
|
| Wrist fracture | Injury, poisoning and procedural complications | MedDRA 16.0 |
|
| Back injury | Injury, poisoning and procedural complications | MedDRA 16.0 |
|
| Fractured olecranon | Injury, poisoning and procedural complications | MedDRA 16.0 |
|
| Hand fracture | Injury, poisoning and procedural complications | MedDRA 16.0 |
|
| Post procedural complication | Injury, poisoning and procedural complications | MedDRA 16.0 |
|
| Post procedural myocardial infarction | Injury, poisoning and procedural complications | MedDRA 16.0 |
|
| Post-traumatic neck syndrome | Injury, poisoning and procedural complications | MedDRA 16.0 |
|
| Road traffic accident | Injury, poisoning and procedural complications | MedDRA 16.0 |
|
| Skin wound | Injury, poisoning and procedural complications | MedDRA 16.0 |
|
| Upper limb fracture | Injury, poisoning and procedural complications | MedDRA 16.0 |
|
| Bone scan | Investigations | MedDRA 16.0 |
|
| Endoscopy | Investigations | MedDRA 16.0 |
|
| Gastrointestinal examination | Investigations | MedDRA 16.0 |
|
| Haemoglobin decreased | Investigations | MedDRA 16.0 |
|
| Prostatic specific antigen increased | Investigations | MedDRA 16.0 |
|
| Staphylococcus test positive | Investigations | MedDRA 16.0 |
|
| Weight decreased | Investigations | MedDRA 16.0 |
|
| Chest X-ray abnormal | Investigations | MedDRA 16.0 |
|
| Computerised tomogram abnormal | Investigations | MedDRA 16.0 |
|
| Investigation | Investigations | MedDRA 16.0 |
|
| Liver function test abnormal | Investigations | MedDRA 16.0 |
|
| Macular reflex abnormal | Investigations | MedDRA 16.0 |
|
| Weight loss | Investigations | MedDRA 16.0 |
|
| Decreased appetite | Metabolism and nutrition disorders | MedDRA 16.0 |
|
| Dehydration | Metabolism and nutrition disorders | MedDRA 16.0 |
|
| Diabetes mellitus | Metabolism and nutrition disorders | MedDRA 16.0 |
|
| Type 2 diabetes mellitus | Metabolism and nutrition disorders | MedDRA 16.0 |
|
| Haemochromatosis | Metabolism and nutrition disorders | MedDRA 16.0 |
|
| Arthralgia | Musculoskeletal and connective tissue disorders | MedDRA 16.0 |
|
| Arthropathy | Musculoskeletal and connective tissue disorders | MedDRA 16.0 |
|
| Back pain | Musculoskeletal and connective tissue disorders | MedDRA 16.0 |
|
| Foot deformity | Musculoskeletal and connective tissue disorders | MedDRA 16.0 |
|
| Intervertebral disc protrusion | Musculoskeletal and connective tissue disorders | MedDRA 16.0 |
|
| Joint crepitation | Musculoskeletal and connective tissue disorders | MedDRA 16.0 |
|
| Joint range of motion decreased | Musculoskeletal and connective tissue disorders | MedDRA 16.0 |
|
| Joint swelling | Musculoskeletal and connective tissue disorders | MedDRA 16.0 |
|
| Limb discomfort | Musculoskeletal and connective tissue disorders | MedDRA 16.0 |
|
| Lumbar spinal stenosis | Musculoskeletal and connective tissue disorders | MedDRA 16.0 |
|
| Mobility decreased | Musculoskeletal and connective tissue disorders | MedDRA 16.0 |
|
| Musculoskeletal pain | Musculoskeletal and connective tissue disorders | MedDRA 16.0 |
|
| Osteoarthritis | Musculoskeletal and connective tissue disorders | MedDRA 16.0 |
|
| Osteonecrosis | Musculoskeletal and connective tissue disorders | MedDRA 16.0 |
|
| Pain groin | Musculoskeletal and connective tissue disorders | MedDRA 16.0 |
|
| Pain in extremity | Musculoskeletal and connective tissue disorders | MedDRA 16.0 |
|
| Patellofemoral pain syndrome | Musculoskeletal and connective tissue disorders | MedDRA 16.0 |
|
| Periarthritis | Musculoskeletal and connective tissue disorders | MedDRA 16.0 |
|
| Rheumatoid arthritis | Musculoskeletal and connective tissue disorders | MedDRA 16.0 |
|
| Rotator cuff syndrome | Musculoskeletal and connective tissue disorders | MedDRA 16.0 |
|
| Spinal column stenosis | Musculoskeletal and connective tissue disorders | MedDRA 16.0 |
|
| Stiff knees | Musculoskeletal and connective tissue disorders | MedDRA 16.0 |
|
| Arthritis | Musculoskeletal and connective tissue disorders | MedDRA 16.0 |
|
| Back disorder | Musculoskeletal and connective tissue disorders | MedDRA 16.0 |
|
| Dupuytren's contracture | Musculoskeletal and connective tissue disorders | MedDRA 16.0 |
|
| Haemarthrosis | Musculoskeletal and connective tissue disorders | MedDRA 16.0 |
|
| Joint contracture | Musculoskeletal and connective tissue disorders | MedDRA 16.0 |
|
| Joint instability | Musculoskeletal and connective tissue disorders | MedDRA 16.0 |
|
| Joint lock | Musculoskeletal and connective tissue disorders | MedDRA 16.0 |
|
| Joint stiffness | Musculoskeletal and connective tissue disorders | MedDRA 16.0 |
|
| Low back pain | Musculoskeletal and connective tissue disorders | MedDRA 16.0 |
|
| Muscular weakness | Musculoskeletal and connective tissue disorders | MedDRA 16.0 |
|
| Musculoskeletal deformity | Musculoskeletal and connective tissue disorders | MedDRA 16.0 |
|
| Musculoskeletal stiffness | Musculoskeletal and connective tissue disorders | MedDRA 16.0 |
|
| Osteosclerosis | Musculoskeletal and connective tissue disorders | MedDRA 16.0 |
|
| Pain in elbow | Musculoskeletal and connective tissue disorders | MedDRA 16.0 |
|
| Pain in hand | Musculoskeletal and connective tissue disorders | MedDRA 16.0 |
|
| Scoliosis | Musculoskeletal and connective tissue disorders | MedDRA 16.0 |
|
| Synovitis | Musculoskeletal and connective tissue disorders | MedDRA 16.0 |
|
| Toe osteoarthritis | Musculoskeletal and connective tissue disorders | MedDRA 16.0 |
|
| Ataxia | Nervous system disorders | MedDRA 16.0 |
|
| Carpal tunnel syndrome | Nervous system disorders | MedDRA 16.0 |
|
| Cerebral haemorrhage | Nervous system disorders | MedDRA 16.0 |
|
| Cerebral infarction | Nervous system disorders | MedDRA 16.0 |
|
| Cerebrovascular accident | Nervous system disorders | MedDRA 16.0 |
|
| Convulsion | Nervous system disorders | MedDRA 16.0 |
|
| Dementia | Nervous system disorders | MedDRA 16.0 |
|
| Dementia Alzheimer's type | Nervous system disorders | MedDRA 16.0 |
|
| Headache | Nervous system disorders | MedDRA 16.0 |
|
| Hemiparesis | Nervous system disorders | MedDRA 16.0 |
|
| Radial nerve palsy | Nervous system disorders | MedDRA 16.0 |
|
| Sciatica | Nervous system disorders | MedDRA 16.0 |
|
| Sensory loss | Nervous system disorders | MedDRA 16.0 |
|
| Syncope | Nervous system disorders | MedDRA 16.0 |
|
| Tethered cord syndrome | Nervous system disorders | MedDRA 16.0 |
|
| Transient ischaemic attack | Nervous system disorders | MedDRA 16.0 |
|
| Brain hypoxia | Nervous system disorders | MedDRA 16.0 |
|
| Burning sensation | Nervous system disorders | MedDRA 16.0 |
|
| Carotid artery stenosis | Nervous system disorders | MedDRA 16.0 |
|
| Dizziness | Nervous system disorders | MedDRA 16.0 |
|
| Dysgraphia | Nervous system disorders | MedDRA 16.0 |
|
| Hydrocephalus | Nervous system disorders | MedDRA 16.0 |
|
| Loss of consciousness | Nervous system disorders | MedDRA 16.0 |
|
| Paraesthesia | Nervous system disorders | MedDRA 16.0 |
|
| Parkinson's disease | Nervous system disorders | MedDRA 16.0 |
|
| Sensory disturbance | Nervous system disorders | MedDRA 16.0 |
|
| Anxiety | Psychiatric disorders | MedDRA 16.0 |
|
| Confusional state | Psychiatric disorders | MedDRA 16.0 |
|
| Depression | Psychiatric disorders | MedDRA 16.0 |
|
| Hallucination, auditory | Psychiatric disorders | MedDRA 16.0 |
|
| Agitation | Psychiatric disorders | MedDRA 16.0 |
|
| Completed suicide | Psychiatric disorders | MedDRA 16.0 |
|
| Haematuria | Renal and urinary disorders | MedDRA 16.0 |
|
| Renal failure | Renal and urinary disorders | MedDRA 16.0 |
|
| Renal failure acute | Renal and urinary disorders | MedDRA 16.0 |
|
| Renal failure chronic | Renal and urinary disorders | MedDRA 16.0 |
|
| Renal mass | Renal and urinary disorders | MedDRA 16.0 |
|
| Chromaturia | Renal and urinary disorders | MedDRA 16.0 |
|
| Incontinence | Renal and urinary disorders | MedDRA 16.0 |
|
| Micturition urgency | Renal and urinary disorders | MedDRA 16.0 |
|
| Nephrolithiasis | Renal and urinary disorders | MedDRA 16.0 |
|
| Urinary retention | Renal and urinary disorders | MedDRA 16.0 |
|
| Urine flow decreased | Renal and urinary disorders | MedDRA 16.0 |
|
| Breast mass | Reproductive system and breast disorders | MedDRA 16.0 |
|
| Testicular swelling | Reproductive system and breast disorders | MedDRA 16.0 |
|
| Cystocele | Reproductive system and breast disorders | MedDRA 16.0 |
|
| Postmenopausal haemorrhage | Reproductive system and breast disorders | MedDRA 16.0 |
|
| Vaginal prolapse | Reproductive system and breast disorders | MedDRA 16.0 |
|
| Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease | Respiratory, thoracic and mediastinal disorders | MedDRA 16.0 |
|
| Cough | Respiratory, thoracic and mediastinal disorders | MedDRA 16.0 |
|
| Dyspnoea | Respiratory, thoracic and mediastinal disorders | MedDRA 16.0 |
|
| Dyspnoea exertional | Respiratory, thoracic and mediastinal disorders | MedDRA 16.0 |
|
| Pulmonary embolism | Respiratory, thoracic and mediastinal disorders | MedDRA 16.0 |
|
| Pulmonary oedema | Respiratory, thoracic and mediastinal disorders | MedDRA 16.0 |
|
| Sleep apnoea syndrome | Respiratory, thoracic and mediastinal disorders | MedDRA 16.0 |
|
| Throat pain | Respiratory, thoracic and mediastinal disorders | MedDRA 16.0 |
|
| Tonsillar disorder | Respiratory, thoracic and mediastinal disorders | MedDRA 16.0 |
|
| Emphysema | Respiratory, thoracic and mediastinal disorders | MedDRA 16.0 |
|
| Haemoptysis | Respiratory, thoracic and mediastinal disorders | MedDRA 16.0 |
|
| Interstitial lung disease | Respiratory, thoracic and mediastinal disorders | MedDRA 16.0 |
|
| Pleural effusion | Respiratory, thoracic and mediastinal disorders | MedDRA 16.0 |
|
| Pneumothorax | Respiratory, thoracic and mediastinal disorders | MedDRA 16.0 |
|
| Respiratory disorder | Respiratory, thoracic and mediastinal disorders | MedDRA 16.0 |
|
| Hyperhidrosis | Skin and subcutaneous tissue disorders | MedDRA 16.0 |
|
| Hyperkeratosis | Skin and subcutaneous tissue disorders | MedDRA 16.0 |
|
| Angioplasty | Surgical and medical procedures | MedDRA 16.0 |
|
| Ankle arthroplasty | Surgical and medical procedures | MedDRA 16.0 |
|
| Cholecystectomy | Surgical and medical procedures | MedDRA 16.0 |
|
| Hip arthroplasty | Surgical and medical procedures | MedDRA 16.0 |
|
| Hospitalisation | Surgical and medical procedures | MedDRA 16.0 |
|
| Joint arthroplasty | Surgical and medical procedures | MedDRA 16.0 |
|
| Knee arthroplasty | Surgical and medical procedures | MedDRA 16.0 |
|
| Rotator cuff repair | Surgical and medical procedures | MedDRA 16.0 |
|
| Shoulder operation | Surgical and medical procedures | MedDRA 16.0 |
|
| Wound drainage | Surgical and medical procedures | MedDRA 16.0 |
|
| Cellulitis | Skin and subcutaneous tissue disorders | MedDRA 16.0 |
|
| Skin lesion | Skin and subcutaneous tissue disorders | MedDRA 16.0 |
|
| Skin ulcer | Skin and subcutaneous tissue disorders | MedDRA 16.0 |
|
| Breast lump removal | Surgical and medical procedures | MedDRA 16.0 |
|
| Hysterectomy | Surgical and medical procedures | MedDRA 16.0 |
|
| Leg amputation | Surgical and medical procedures | MedDRA 16.0 |
|
| Surgery | Surgical and medical procedures | MedDRA 16.0 |
|
| Aortic aneurysm | Vascular disorders | MedDRA 16.0 |
|
| Aortic aneurysm rupture | Vascular disorders | MedDRA 16.0 |
|
| Deep vein thrombosis | Vascular disorders | MedDRA 16.0 |
|
| Haemorrhage | Vascular disorders | MedDRA 16.0 |
|
| Orthostatic hypotension | Vascular disorders | MedDRA 16.0 |
|
| Peripheral artery aneurysm | Vascular disorders | MedDRA 16.0 |
|
| Varicose vein | Vascular disorders | MedDRA 16.0 |
|
| Embolism | Vascular disorders | MedDRA 16.0 |
|
| Haematoma | Vascular disorders | MedDRA 16.0 |
|
| Peripheral vascular disorder | Vascular disorders | MedDRA 16.0 |
|
| Phlebitis | Vascular disorders | MedDRA 16.0 |
|
| Post thrombotic syndrome | Vascular disorders | MedDRA 16.0 |
|
| Adenocarcinoma | Neoplasms benign, malignant and unspecified (incl cysts and polyps) | MedDRA 16.0 |
|
| Basal cell carcinoma | Neoplasms benign, malignant and unspecified (incl cysts and polyps) | MedDRA 16.0 |
|
| Benign neoplasm of bladder | Neoplasms benign, malignant and unspecified (incl cysts and polyps) | MedDRA 16.0 |
|
| Bladder cancer | Neoplasms benign, malignant and unspecified (incl cysts and polyps) | MedDRA 16.0 |
|
| Bladder neoplasm | Neoplasms benign, malignant and unspecified (incl cysts and polyps) | MedDRA 16.0 |
|
| Bladder neoplasms | Neoplasms benign, malignant and unspecified (incl cysts and polyps) | MedDRA 16.0 |
|
| Breast cancer | Neoplasms benign, malignant and unspecified (incl cysts and polyps) | MedDRA 16.0 |
|
| Hepatic cancer | Neoplasms benign, malignant and unspecified (incl cysts and polyps) | MedDRA 16.0 |
|
| Invasive ductal breast carcinoma | Neoplasms benign, malignant and unspecified (incl cysts and polyps) | MedDRA 16.0 |
|
| Lung metastases | Neoplasms benign, malignant and unspecified (incl cysts and polyps) | MedDRA 16.0 |
|
| Lung neoplasm malignant | Neoplasms benign, malignant and unspecified (incl cysts and polyps) | MedDRA 16.0 |
|
| Malignant melanoma | Neoplasms benign, malignant and unspecified (incl cysts and polyps) | MedDRA 16.0 |
|
| Metastases to bone | Neoplasms benign, malignant and unspecified (incl cysts and polyps) | MedDRA 16.0 |
|
| Neoplasm malignant | Neoplasms benign, malignant and unspecified (incl cysts and polyps) | MedDRA 16.0 |
|
| Non-Hodgkin's lymphoma | Neoplasms benign, malignant and unspecified (incl cysts and polyps) | MedDRA 16.0 |
|
| Oesophageal adenocarcinoma | Neoplasms benign, malignant and unspecified (incl cysts and polyps) | MedDRA 16.0 |
|
| Pelvic neoplasm | Neoplasms benign, malignant and unspecified (incl cysts and polyps) | MedDRA 16.0 |
|
| Prostate cancer | Neoplasms benign, malignant and unspecified (incl cysts and polyps) | MedDRA 16.0 |
|
| Prostate cancer metastatic | Neoplasms benign, malignant and unspecified (incl cysts and polyps) | MedDRA 16.0 |
|
| Prostatic neoplasms malignant | Neoplasms benign, malignant and unspecified (incl cysts and polyps) | MedDRA 16.0 |
|
| Small intestine adenocarcinoma | Neoplasms benign, malignant and unspecified (incl cysts and polyps) | MedDRA 16.0 |
|
| Uterine cancer | Neoplasms benign, malignant and unspecified (incl cysts and polyps) | MedDRA 16.0 |
|
| Benign renal neoplasm | Neoplasms benign, malignant and unspecified (incl cysts and polyps) | MedDRA 16.0 |
|
| Brain secondaries | Neoplasms benign, malignant and unspecified (incl cysts and polyps) | MedDRA 16.0 |
|
| Gastrointestinal carcinoma | Neoplasms benign, malignant and unspecified (incl cysts and polyps) | MedDRA 16.0 |
|
| Lipoma | Neoplasms benign, malignant and unspecified (incl cysts and polyps) | MedDRA 16.0 |
|
| Lymphoma | Neoplasms benign, malignant and unspecified (incl cysts and polyps) | MedDRA 16.0 |
|
| Meningioma | Neoplasms benign, malignant and unspecified (incl cysts and polyps) | MedDRA 16.0 |
|
| Metastases to central nervous system | Neoplasms benign, malignant and unspecified (incl cysts and polyps) | MedDRA 16.0 |
|
| Metastasis | Neoplasms benign, malignant and unspecified (incl cysts and polyps) | MedDRA 16.0 |
|
| Ovarian cancer | Neoplasms benign, malignant and unspecified (incl cysts and polyps) | MedDRA 16.0 |
|
| Pituitary tumor NOS | Neoplasms benign, malignant and unspecified (incl cysts and polyps) | MedDRA 16.0 |
|
| Rectal cancer | Neoplasms benign, malignant and unspecified (incl cysts and polyps) | MedDRA 16.0 |
|
| Skin cancer | Neoplasms benign, malignant and unspecified (incl cysts and polyps) | MedDRA 16.0 |
|
| Squamous cell carcinoma | Neoplasms benign, malignant and unspecified (incl cysts and polyps) | MedDRA 16.0 |
|
| Ischaemic Heart Disease | Cardiac disorders | MedDRA 16.0 |
|
| Cyst | General disorders | MedDRA 16.0 |
|
| Periorbital contusion | Injury, poisoning and procedural complications | MedDRA 16.0 |
|
| Bone Cancer | Neoplasms benign, malignant and unspecified (incl cysts and polyps) | MedDRA 16.0 |
|
| Gastric Cancer | Neoplasms benign, malignant and unspecified (incl cysts and polyps) | MedDRA 16.0 |
|
| Liver Cancer | Neoplasms benign, malignant and unspecified (incl cysts and polyps) | MedDRA 16.0 |
|
| Oesophageal carcinoma | Neoplasms benign, malignant and unspecified (incl cysts and polyps) | MedDRA 16.0 |
|
| Nasal Polyps | Respiratory, thoracic and mediastinal disorders | MedDRA 16.0 |
|
| Cold Sweat | Skin and subcutaneous tissue disorders | MedDRA 16.0 |
|
DePuy reserves the right to review the contents of publications in advance.The PI may freely disclose the trial results only after DePuy has been given the opportunity of reviewing the proposed results communications at least 30 days prior to the intended release.DePuy will advise the PI of any perceived errors,omissions or corrections but the PI will retain final editorial control.In case of disagreement,DePuy and the PI will make every effort to meet in order to discuss and resolve any issues.
| D012216 |
| Rheumatic Diseases |