Print page Print page
Switch language
The Capital Region of Denmark - a part of Copenhagen University Hospital

Randomized clinical trial of medial unicompartmentel versus total knee arthroplasty for anteromedial tibio-femoral osteoarthritis. The study-protocol

Research output: Contribution to journalJournal articleResearchpeer-review

  1. Joint hypermobility in athletes is associated with shoulder injuries: a systematic review and meta-analysis

    Research output: Contribution to journalReviewResearchpeer-review

  2. A quality of life questionnaire for patients with scapula alata (SA-Q): development and validation

    Research output: Contribution to journalJournal articleResearchpeer-review

  3. Fear avoidance beliefs as a predictor for long-term sick leave, disability and pain in patients with chronic low back pain

    Research output: Contribution to journalJournal articleResearchpeer-review

  1. Drug-related challenges following primary total hip and knee arthroplasty

    Research output: Contribution to journalJournal articleResearchpeer-review

  2. MRi of the knee compared to specialized radiography for measurements of articular cartilage height in knees with osteoarthritis

    Research output: Contribution to journalJournal articleResearchpeer-review

View graph of relations

BACKGROUND: In treatment of isolated medial unicondylar osteoarthritis of the knee, it is possible to choose between medial unicondylar knee arthroplasty (mUKA), or a total knee prosthesis (TKA). The demand for a blinded multicenter RCT with the comparison of mUKA and TKA has been increasing in recent years, to determine which prosthesis is better. Supporters of TKA suggest this treatment gives a more predictable and better result, whereas supporters of UKA suggest it is unnecessary to remove functional cartilage in other compartments. If the mUKA is worn or loosens, revision surgery will be relatively easy, whereas revision-surgery after a TKA can be more problematic.

METHODS: A double-blinded multicenter Randomized Clinical Trial setup is the aim of the study. 6 hospitals throughout all 5 municipal regions of Denmark will be participating in the study. 350 patients will be included prospectively. Follow-up will be with PROM-questionnaires and clinical controls up to 20 years.

DISCUSSION: Results will be assessed in terms of 1) PROM-questionnaires, 2) Clinical assessment of knee condition, 3) cost analysis. To avoid bias, all participants except the theatre-staff will be blinded.

PROMS: OKS, KOOS, SF36, Forgotten Joint Score, EQ5D, UCLA activity scale, Copenhagen Knee ROM scale, and Anchor questions. Publications are planned at 2, 5 and 10 years after inclusion of the last patient. The development of variables over time will be analyzed by calculating the area under the curve (AUC) for the variable relative to the initial value, and comparisons of the between-group differences will be based on parametric statistics. In this study, we feel that we have designed a study that will address these concerns with a well-designed double-blinded multicentre RCT.

TRIAL REGISTRATION: ID: NCT03396640 . Initial Release: 09/19/2017. Date of enrolment of first participant: 10/11/17.

Original languageEnglish
JournalBMC Musculoskeletal Disorders
Issue number1
Pages (from-to)119
Publication statusPublished - 20 Mar 2019

    Research areas

  • Adolescent, Arthroplasty, Replacement, Knee/methods, Child, Child, Preschool, Double-Blind Method, Female, Femur/diagnostic imaging, Follow-Up Studies, Humans, Infant, Infant, Newborn, Male, Osteoarthritis, Knee/diagnostic imaging, Prospective Studies, Tibia/diagnostic imaging, Young Adult

ID: 59139041