One-stage versus two-stage revision of the infected knee arthroplasty - a randomized multicenter clinical trial study protocol

One-stage vs Two-stage Collaboration Group, Martin Lindberg-Larsen*, Anders Odgaard, Charlotte Fredborg, Henrik Morville Schrøder

*Corresponding author af dette arbejde

Publikation: Bidrag til tidsskriftProtokolForskningpeer review

Abstract

BACKGROUND: A two-stage prosthesis exchange procedure has been the gold standard in surgical treatment of the chronically infected knee arthroplasty so far. This includes 2 surgeries/hospitalizations and an interim period of 2-3 months between surgeries with impaired health, functional status and quality of life of the patients. A one-stage exchange procedure holds many obvious advantages compared to the two-stage approach, but outcomes of a one-stage versus two-stage procedures have never been investigated in a randomized clinical trial. The purpose of this study is primarily to investigate time-adjusted differences in functional status of patients after one-stage versus two-stage revision. Secondary, to report time-adjusted differences in quality of life, complications (including re-revisions due to infection) and mortality.

METHODS: This study is a pragmatic, multi-center, randomized, non-inferiority trial comparing one-stage versus two-stage revision of the infected knee arthroplasty. Seven Danish hospitals are currently participating in the study, but additional hospitals can enter the study if adhering to protocol. Ninety-six patients will be included prospectively. Follow-up will be with PROM-questionnaires and clinical controls up to 10 years. The patients who are not able to participate in the randomized trial are followed in a parallel cohort study.

PROM'S: Oxford Knee Score and EQ5D + EQ5D VAS questionnaires are completed preoperatively and sent out to the study participants at 6 weeks, 3, 6, 9, 12, 18 and 24 months as well as 5 and 10 years postoperatively. In addition a tailor made cost questionnaire on the non-treating hospital resource use, community health and social service use, travel costs, time off work and informal care are sent out.

DISCUSSION: If one of the two treatment alternatives is found superior in both domains of quality of life (both knee-specific and generic) and health economics, that treatment should be promoted. Other outcomes will open informed discussions about treatment strategies for periprosthetic knee infections.

TRIAL REGISTRATION: The randomized trial is registered on ClinicalTrials.gov with ID NCT03435679 , initial release date January 31, 2018 and the cohort study is registered with ID NCT04427943 , submitted January 8, 2020 and posted June 11, 2020.

OriginalsprogEngelsk
Sider (fra-til)175
TidsskriftBMC Musculoskeletal Disorders
Vol/bind22
Udgave nummer1
DOI
StatusUdgivet - 12 feb. 2021

Fingeraftryk

Udforsk hvilke forskningsemner 'One-stage versus two-stage revision of the infected knee arthroplasty - a randomized multicenter clinical trial study protocol' indeholder.

Citationsformater