Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
This study is a prospective, randomized, longitudinal study of the clinical outcomes of osteoarthritis patients treated by two different alignment philosophies for total knee replacement. All patients will be treated with the same knee system, implanted using MAKO robotic-arm assisted technology.
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
| Label | Type | Description | Intervention Names |
|---|---|---|---|
| Alignment according to Functional Alignment philosophy | Active Comparator | Patients randomized to this group will undergo a TKA (total knee arthroplasty) to receive a Triathlon Total Knee System aligned according to Functional Alignment philosophy. This method of implant alignment is defined by a patient's native joint line as well as the soft tissue envelope. Triathlon Total Knee System components will be positioned relative to intra-operative soft tissue laxity assessment. A mobile application (KneeBalancer) will be used to assist surgeon decision making during the dynamic joint balancing surgical step. |
|
| Alignment to the patient's natural Mechanical axis | Active Comparator | Patients randomized to this group will undergo a TKA (total knee arthroplasty) to receive a Triathlon Total Knee System neutrally aligned to the Mechanical axis. More specifically, the femoral component and tibial component are aligned 0° to the mechanical axis of each respective limb. Femoral component rotation is fixed to the trans-epicondylar axis. Soft tissue releases are performed at the discretion of the surgeon to achieve balance and full range of motion. |
|
| Name | Type | Description | Arm Group Labels | Other Names |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Triathlon® Total Knee System (Stryker Orthopaedics, Mahwah, NJ USA) | Device | All patients, regardless of the alignment arm they are randomized to will undergo a primary total knee arthroplasty with the Triathlon® Total Knee System using Mako Robotic-Arm Assisted Technology. The surgical intervention will be administered by a physician wherein the expected duration of surgery is approximately 1.5 hours. |
| Measure | Description | Time Frame |
|---|---|---|
| Joint feeling and Forgotten Joint Score | To evaluate differences in joint feeling assessed via the Forgotten Joint Score. This newly-developed 12-item score ranges from 0 to 100 and assesses how aware recipients are of their joint in everyday life. Higher scores indicate a good outcome i.e. a high degree of forgetting the joint. For the purpose of this study a change in score of 14 points for the Forgotten Joint Score has been identified. | Pre-operative (2 weeks prior to surgery), Post-operative - 6 weeks, 6 months, 12 months (primary timepoint) and 24 months |
| Measure | Description | Time Frame |
|---|---|---|
| Function and Oxford Knee Score | To evaluate differences in function between Robotic Assisted Functional Alignment and Robotic Assisted Mechanical Alignment. This will be achieved by employing the following instrument: Oxford Knee Score. This score ranges from 0 to 48 where a higher score indicates a better outcome. | Pre-operative (2 weeks prior to surgery), Post-operative - 6 weeks, 6 months, 12 months and 24 months |
Not provided
Inclusion Criteria:
Exclusion Criteria:
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
| Name | Affiliation | Role |
|---|---|---|
| Simon Young, Dr | North Shore Hospital | Principal Investigator |
| Facility | Status | City | State | ZIP | Country | Contacts |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| North Shore Hospital | Takapuna | Auckland | 0622 | New Zealand |
| PubMed Identifier | Type | Citation | Retractions |
|---|---|---|---|
| 35858944 | Derived | Young SW, Zeng N, Tay ML, Fulker D, Esposito C, Carter M, Bayan A, Farrington B, Van Rooyen R, Walker M. A prospective randomised controlled trial of mechanical axis with soft tissue release balancing vs functional alignment with bony resection balancing in total knee replacement-a study using Stryker Mako robotic arm-assisted technology. Trials. 2022 Jul 20;23(1):580. doi: 10.1186/s13063-022-06494-4. |
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
|
| Function and The International Knee Society Score | To evaluate differences in function between Robotic Assisted Functional Alignment and Robotic Assisted Mechanical Alignment. This will be achieved by employing the following instrument: The International Knee Society Score. This score ranges from 0 to 100 where a higher score correlates to a better outcome. | Pre-operative (2 weeks prior to surgery), Post-operative - 6 weeks, 12 months and 24 months |
| Function and Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score | To evaluate differences in function between Robotic Assisted Functional Alignment and Robotic Assisted Mechanical Alignment. This will be achieved by employing the following instrument: Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score. This score ranges from 0 to 100 where 0 indicates the worst possible knee symptoms and 100 signifies no knee symptoms. | Pre-operative (2 weeks prior to surgery), Post-operative - 6 weeks, 6 months, 12 months and 24 months |
| Pain and Oxford Knee Score | To evaluate differences in pain between Robotic Assisted Functional Alignment and Robotic Assisted Mechanical Alignment. This will be achieved by employing the following instrument: Oxford Knee Score. This score ranges from 0 to 48 where a higher score indicates a better outcome. | Pre-operative (2 weeks prior to surgery), Post-operative - 6 weeks, 6 months, 12 months and 24 months |
| Pain and The International Knee Society Score | To evaluate differences in pain between Robotic Assisted Functional Alignment and Robotic Assisted Mechanical Alignment. This will be achieved by employing the following instrument: The International Knee Society Score. This score ranges from 0 to 100 where a higher score correlates to a better outcome. | Pre-operative (2 weeks prior to surgery), Post-operative - 6 weeks, 12 months and 24 months |
| Pain and Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score | To evaluate differences in pain between Robotic Assisted Functional Alignment and Robotic Assisted Mechanical Alignment. This will be achieved by employing the following instrument: Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score. This score ranges from 0 to 100 where 0 indicates the worst possible knee symptoms and 100 signifies no knee symptoms. | Pre-operative (2 weeks prior to surgery), Post-operative - 6 weeks, 6 months, 12 months and 24 months |
| Pain and Visual Analogue Scale | To evaluate differences in pain between Robotic Assisted Functional Alignment and Robotic Assisted Mechanical Alignment. This will be achieved by employing the following graphic measurement instrument: Visual Analogue Scale. This scale is a continuum between no pain and the worst possible pain imaginable. | Pre-operative (2 weeks prior to surgery), Post-operative - 6 weeks, 6 months, 12 months and 24 months |
| Satisfaction and Net Promoter Score | To evaluate differences in satisfaction between Robotic Assisted Functional Alignment and Robotic Assisted Mechanical Alignment. This will be achieved by employing the following instrument: Net Promoter. This score ranges from -100 to 100 where the upper end indicates the patient's recommendation of the healthcare they received. | Pre-operative (2 weeks prior to surgery), Post-operative - 6 weeks, 6 months, 12 months and 24 months |
| Health related quality of life and Euro-Qol (EQ-5D-3L) | To evaluate differences in health-related quality of life between Robotic Assisted Functional Alignment and Robotic Assisted Mechanical Alignment. This will be achieved by employing the following instrument: Euro-Qol (EQ-5D-3L). This score ranges from 0 to 100 where 0 correlates to the worst imaginable health state whilst 100 indicates the best. | Pre-operative (2 weeks prior to surgery), Post-operative - 6 weeks, 6 months, 12 months and 24 months |
| Early pain | To evaluate differences in early pain (i.e. from in-patient setting to 6-months post operation) between Robotic Assisted Functional Alignment and Robotic Assisted Mechanical Alignment. This objective will be achieved through the use of a patient pain inventory form. | In-patient setting (< 5 days post-operation), Post-operative - 6 weeks and 6 months |
| Early function | To evaluate differences in early function between Robotic Assisted Functional Alignment and Robotic Assisted Mechanical Alignment. This objective will be achieved by utilizing functional tests conducted by physiotherapists. The following functional test will be carried out on the knee joint: Range of motion | In-patient setting (< 5 days post-operation) |
| Early function | To evaluate differences in early function between Robotic Assisted Functional Alignment and Robotic Assisted Mechanical Alignment. This objective will be achieved by utilizing functional tests conducted by physiotherapists. The following functional test will be employed: 9 step stair climb | In-patient setting (< 5 days post-operation) |
| Early function | To evaluate differences in early function between Robotic Assisted Functional Alignment and Robotic Assisted Mechanical Alignment. This objective will be achieved by utilizing functional tests conducted by physiotherapists. The following functional test will be employed: fast paced 10m walk test | In-patient setting (< 5 days post-operation) |
| Early function | To evaluate differences in early function between Robotic Assisted Functional Alignment and Robotic Assisted Mechanical Alignment. This objective will be achieved by utilizing functional tests conducted by physiotherapists. The following functional test will be employed: 30 second chair stand test | In-patient setting (< 5 days post-operation) |
| Blood loss | To compare blood loss between Robotic Assisted Functional Alignment and Robotic Assisted Mechanical Alignment. This objective will be achieved through obtaining surgical data. | Intra-operative |
| Adjustments to balance | To compare adjustments to balance between Robotic Assisted Functional Alignment and Robotic Assisted Mechanical Alignment. This objective will be achieved through obtaining the position from the Robotic system. | Intra-operative |
| Ability to reach target knee balance as assessed by alignment angles and gaps | To compare the ability to achieve soft tissue balance between Robotic Assisted Functional Alignment and Robotic Assisted Mechanical Alignment. This object will be achieved by comparing pre-operative plan and pre-resection gaps with the final surgical plan and implanted gaps as derived from the robotic system. The implant position is defined as the angulation of components and resected bone in each anatomical plane. The soft tissue balance is defined as gaps created in extension and 90° of flexion when stressing the medial compartment (medial collateral ligament) and lateral compartment (lateral collateral ligament). The overall limb alignment is assessed by comparing the Hip-Knee-Ankle angle from pre-operative to 1-year post-operative on a long leg weight bearing x-ray. | Pre-operative (2 weeks prior to surgery), intra-operative, Post-operative - 6 weeks, 12 months and 24 months |
Not provided
| Release Date | Unrelease Date | Unrelease Date Unknown | Reset Date | MCP Release Number |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Dec 16, 2025 | Jan 7, 2026 | 2 | ||
| Jun 3, 2026 | Jun 26, 2026 | 3 |
| ID | Term |
|---|---|
| D010003 | Osteoarthritis |
| ID | Term |
|---|---|
| D001168 | Arthritis |
| D007592 | Joint Diseases |
| D009140 | Musculoskeletal Diseases |
| D012216 | Rheumatic Diseases |
Not provided
Not provided