Please note that the copy function is not enabled for this field.
If you wish to
modify
existing outcomes, please copy and paste the current outcome text into the Update field.
A database of clinical trials and their results from Australia, New Zealand, and other countries.
account_circle
Log in
to register or update your trial
search
Search for trials
Trial Review
The safety and scientific validity of this study is the responsibility of the study sponsor and investigators. Listing a study does not mean it has been endorsed by the ANZCTR. Before participating in a study, talk to your health care provider and refer to this
information for consumers
Download to PDF
Trial details imported from ClinicalTrials.gov
For full trial details, please see the original record at
https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT04797897
Registration number
NCT04797897
Ethics application status
Date submitted
12/03/2021
Date registered
15/03/2021
Date last updated
25/03/2025
Titles & IDs
Public title
Study to Evaluate the Safety and Effectiveness of REAL INTELLIGENCE™ CORI™ in Unicondylar Knee Arthroplasty (UKA) Procedures
Query!
Scientific title
A Prospective, Multi-center, Randomized Controlled Study to Evaluate the Safety and Effectiveness of REAL INTELLIGENCE™ CORI™ in Unicondylar Knee Arthroplasty (UKA) Procedures
Query!
Secondary ID [1]
0
0
CORI.2019.06
Query!
Universal Trial Number (UTN)
Query!
Trial acronym
CORI RCT UKA
Query!
Linked study record
Query!
Health condition
Health condition(s) or problem(s) studied:
Non-inflammatory Degenerative Joint Disease
0
0
Query!
Osteoarthritis
0
0
Query!
Avascular Necrosis
0
0
Query!
Requires Correction of Functional Deformity
0
0
Query!
Fracture, Knee
0
0
Query!
Condition category
Condition code
Musculoskeletal
0
0
0
0
Query!
Osteoarthritis
Query!
Musculoskeletal
0
0
0
0
Query!
Other muscular and skeletal disorders
Query!
Other
0
0
0
0
Query!
Research that is not of generic health relevance and not applicable to specific health categories listed above
Query!
Intervention/exposure
Study type
Interventional
Query!
Description of intervention(s) / exposure
Treatment: Devices - CORI
Treatment: Devices - Conventional
Experimental: CORI UKA - Subjects in need for unicondylar knee arthroplasty (UKA) as decided by their doctor and treated with CORI.
Active comparator: Conventional UKA - Subjects in need for unicondylar knee arthroplasty (UKA) as decided by their doctor and treated with conventional approach with conventional manual instrumentation.
Treatment: Devices: CORI
unicondylar knee arthroplasty (UKA) treated with CORI
Treatment: Devices: Conventional
unicondylar knee arthroplasty (UKA) treated with conventional approach with conventional manual instrumentation
Query!
Intervention code [1]
0
0
Treatment: Devices
Query!
Comparator / control treatment
Query!
Control group
Query!
Outcomes
Primary outcome [1]
0
0
Post-operative Leg Alignment
Query!
Assessment method [1]
0
0
The number of participants with knees achieving post-operative leg alignment was taken by radiographic assessment at 6 weeks. Post-operative leg alignment was achieved when the deviation from the participant specific target did not exceed ±3 degrees.
Query!
Timepoint [1]
0
0
6 weeks
Query!
Secondary outcome [1]
0
0
Component Alignment: Femoral Antero-Posterior (A/P) Angle
Query!
Assessment method [1]
0
0
Component alignment assessed on long leg standing antero-posterior (A/P) X-rays and standard non weight bearing lateral X-rays taken 6 weeks after surgery. From the A/P radiograph, the femoral flexion angle in degrees was obtained using standard radiographic tools. Femoral flexion angle is defined as the angle formed between a line across the base of the femoral condyles and a line that is centered along the femoral canal.
Query!
Timepoint [1]
0
0
6 weeks
Query!
Secondary outcome [2]
0
0
Component Alignment: Tibial Antero-Posterior (A/P) Angle
Query!
Assessment method [2]
0
0
Component alignment assessed on long leg standing antero-posterior (A/P) X-rays and standard non weight bearing lateral X-rays taken 6 weeks after surgery. From the A/P radiograph, the tibial angle denotes the angle formed on the medial side of the knee from intersecting lines parallel to the tibial base plate and a line drawn parallel to the tibial canal.
Query!
Timepoint [2]
0
0
6 weeks
Query!
Secondary outcome [3]
0
0
Component Alignment: Total Antero-Posterior (A/P) Valgus Angle
Query!
Assessment method [3]
0
0
Component alignment assessed on long leg standing antero-posterior (A/P) X-rays and standard non weight bearing lateral X-rays taken 6 weeks after surgery. The total valgus angle is the sum of the femoral flexion angle and the tibial angle.
Query!
Timepoint [3]
0
0
6 weeks
Query!
Secondary outcome [4]
0
0
Component Alignment: Lateral View Femoral Flexion Angle
Query!
Assessment method [4]
0
0
Component alignment assessed on long leg standing antero-posterior (A/P) X-rays and standard non weight bearing lateral X-rays taken 6 weeks after surgery. The lateral view femoral flexion angle in degrees was obtained from the intersection of a line from the center of the femoral implant to the top of the femur with a line through the femoral canal. The angle is measured on the proximal side of the intersection.
Query!
Timepoint [4]
0
0
6 weeks
Query!
Secondary outcome [5]
0
0
Component Alignment: Lateral View Tibial Angle
Query!
Assessment method [5]
0
0
Component alignment assessed on long leg standing antero-posterior (A/P) X-rays and standard non weight bearing lateral X-rays taken 6 weeks after surgery. The lateral view tibial angle in degrees was obtained from the intersection of a line drawn parallel to the bottom of the tibial base insert and a line through the center of the tibial base and the tibial canal.
Query!
Timepoint [5]
0
0
6 weeks
Query!
Secondary outcome [6]
0
0
Radiographic Assessment
Query!
Assessment method [6]
0
0
Radiographic assessment measured by number of participants with any radiographic finds on antero-posterior (A/P) and lateral (L) views (yes/no). Radiographic findings indicated the presence of radiolucent lines, osteolysis \& implant migration.
Query!
Timepoint [6]
0
0
12 months
Query!
Secondary outcome [7]
0
0
2011 Knee Society Score (KSS): Objective Knee Score
Query!
Assessment method [7]
0
0
The 2011 Knee Society Score consists of 4 separate sub-scales. The "Objective" Knee Score is seven items with a range of 0 to 100, with a higher score indicating a better outcome.
Query!
Timepoint [7]
0
0
Baseline, 6 weeks, 6 months, and 12 months
Query!
Secondary outcome [8]
0
0
2011 Knee Society Score (KSS): Satisfaction Knee Score
Query!
Assessment method [8]
0
0
The 2011 Knee Society Score consists of 4 separate sub-scales. The Patient Satisfaction Score is five items with a range of 0 to 40, with a higher score indicating a better outcome.
Query!
Timepoint [8]
0
0
Baseline, 6 weeks, 6 months, and 12 months
Query!
Secondary outcome [9]
0
0
2011 Knee Society Score (KSS): Expectation Score
Query!
Assessment method [9]
0
0
The 2011 Knee Society Score consists of 4 separate sub-scales. The Patient Expectation Score is three items with a range of 0 to 15, with a higher score indicating a better outcome. The Expectation score indicates the patient's opinion on the extent they expect the operation to improve their knee pain, and ability to perform activities of daily living and recreational activities.
Query!
Timepoint [9]
0
0
Baseline, 6 weeks, 6 months, and 12 months
Query!
Secondary outcome [10]
0
0
2011 Knee Society Score (KSS): Functional Score
Query!
Assessment method [10]
0
0
The 2011 Knee Society Score consists of 4 separate sub-scales. The Functional Score is nineteen items with a range of 0 to 100, with a higher score indicating a better outcome. Functional Score is derived from assessments of walking and standing, standard activities, advanced activities, and discretionary activities.
Query!
Timepoint [10]
0
0
Baseline, 6 weeks, 6 months, and 12 months
Query!
Secondary outcome [11]
0
0
Oxford Knee Score (OKS)
Query!
Assessment method [11]
0
0
The Oxford Knee Score (OKS) is a Patient Reported Outcome questionnaire that was developed to assess perceived function and pain answered on a Likert scale. Responses to each question ranges from 0-4 with a range of a possible overall score from 0-48. A score of 0 is the worst possible outcome while a score of 48 is the best possible outcome.
Query!
Timepoint [11]
0
0
Baseline, 6 weeks, 6 months, and 12 months
Query!
Secondary outcome [12]
0
0
Forgotten Joint Score (FJS)
Query!
Assessment method [12]
0
0
The Forgotten Joint Score (FJS) comprises measures for the assessment of joint-specific patient reported outcomes. Participants are asked to rate their awareness of their knee arthroplasty in 12 questions with a five point Likert response format: "Never", "almost never", "seldom", "sometimes" and "mostly". The item scores are summed and linearly transformed in a 0 to 100 scale with a high value reflecting the ability of the subject to forget about the replaced knee joint during the activities of daily living (i.e., a higher score is a better outcome).
Query!
Timepoint [12]
0
0
6 weeks, 6 months, and 12 months
Query!
Secondary outcome [13]
0
0
Five-level EuroQol Five-dimensional (EQ-5D-5L): Index Score
Query!
Assessment method [13]
0
0
The EQ-5D-5L score consists of two parts: a descriptive system and a visual analogue scale (VAS). The descriptive system (i.e., index score) is used to describe the participant's health state and consists of five dimensions: mobility, self-care, usual activities, pain/discomfort and anxiety/depression. Each dimension has 5 levels to choose the most appropriate answer: no problems, slight problems, moderate problems, severe problems and extreme problems. The participant is asked to indicate their health state by marking the most appropriate statement in each of the five areas. The EQ-5D-5L Index Score was based on a scale of 0 to 1, with higher index values indicating better health and lower index values indicating worse health.
Query!
Timepoint [13]
0
0
Baseline, 6 weeks, 6 months, and 12 months
Query!
Secondary outcome [14]
0
0
Five-level EuroQol Five-dimensional (EQ-5D-5L): Visal Analogue Scale (VAS) Score
Query!
Assessment method [14]
0
0
The EQ-5D-5L score consists of two parts: a descriptive system and a visual analogue scale (VAS). The VAS records the participant's self-rated health on a vertical visual analogue scale. The scale ranges from 0 to 100 where 0 indicates 'The worst health you can imagine' and 100 indicates 'The best health you can imagine'.
Query!
Timepoint [14]
0
0
Baseline, 6 weeks, 6 months, and 12 months
Query!
Eligibility
Key inclusion criteria
1. Subject is a suitable candidate for a UKA procedure using CORI and a compatible S+N Knee implant system.
2. Subject requires a cemented UKA as a primary indication that meets any of the following conditions:
1. Non-inflammatory degenerative joint disease, including osteoarthritis
2. Avascular necrosis
3. Requires correction of functional deformity
4. Requires treatment of fractures that were unmanageable using other techniques
3. Subject is of legal age to consent and considered skeletally mature (= 18 years of age at the time of surgery).
4. Subject agrees to consent to and to follow the study visit schedule (as defined in the study protocol and informed consent form), by signing the Ethics Committee (EC) or Institutional Review Board (IRB) approved informed consent form.
5. Subject plans to be available through one (1) year postoperative follow-up.
6. Applicable routine radiographic assessment if possible.
Query!
Minimum age
18
Years
Query!
Query!
Maximum age
No limit
Query!
Query!
Sex
Both males and females
Query!
Can healthy volunteers participate?
No
Query!
Key exclusion criteria
1. Subject receives a UKA on the index joint as a revision for a previously failed surgery, or need for complex implants, or any other implant than a standard UKA (e.g. stems, augments, or custom made devices).
2. Subject has been diagnosed with post-traumatic arthritis
3. Subject receives simultaneous bilateral UKA OR a unilateral UKA with contralateral TKA.
4. Subject has one or more of the following arthroplasties that are not fully healed and well-functioning, as determined by the investigator:-Contralateral primary TKA or UKA, however, the subject can only have one knee enrolled in this study.
5. Subject does not understand the language used in the Informed Consent Form.
6. Subject does not meet the indication or is contraindicated for UKA according to specific S+N knee system's Instructions For Use (IFU).
7. Subject has active infection or sepsis (treated or untreated).
8. Subject is morbidly obese with a body mass index (BMI) greater than 40.
9. Subject is pregnant or breast feeding at the time of surgery.
10. Subject, in the opinion of the Investigator, has advanced osteoarthritis or joint disease at the time of surgery and was better suited for an alternate procedure.
11. Subject currently enrolled in another orthopedic clinical trial study.
12. Subject has a condition(s) that may interfere with the UKA survival or outcome (i.e., Paget's or Charcot's disease, vascular insufficiency, muscular atrophy, uncontrolled diabetes, moderate to severe renal insufficiency or neuromuscular disease, or an active, local infection).
13. Subject in the opinion of the Investigator has an emotional or neurological condition that would pre-empt their ability or willingness to participate in the study including mental illness, intellectual disability, drug or alcohol abuse.
14. Subject, in the opinion of the Investigator, has a neuromuscular disorder that prohibited control of the index joint.
15. Subject is a prisoner or meets the definition of a Vulnerable Subject per ISO 14155:2020 Section 3.55.
Query!
Study design
Purpose of the study
Treatment
Query!
Allocation to intervention
Randomised controlled trial
Query!
Procedure for enrolling a subject and allocating the treatment (allocation concealment procedures)
Query!
Methods used to generate the sequence in which subjects will be randomised (sequence generation)
Query!
Masking / blinding
Open (masking not used)
Query!
Who is / are masked / blinded?
Query!
Query!
Query!
Query!
Intervention assignment
Parallel
Query!
Other design features
Query!
Phase
Not applicable
Query!
Type of endpoint/s
Query!
Statistical methods / analysis
Query!
Recruitment
Recruitment status
Stopped early
Query!
Data analysis
Query!
Reason for early stopping/withdrawal
Query!
Other reasons
Query!
Date of first participant enrolment
Anticipated
Query!
Actual
12/02/2022
Query!
Date of last participant enrolment
Anticipated
Query!
Actual
Query!
Date of last data collection
Anticipated
Query!
Actual
16/02/2024
Query!
Sample size
Target
Query!
Accrual to date
Query!
Final
4
Query!
Recruitment in Australia
Recruitment state(s)
Query!
Recruitment hospital [1]
0
0
Northern Hospital - Epping
Query!
Recruitment postcode(s) [1]
0
0
3076 - Epping
Query!
Recruitment outside Australia
Country [1]
0
0
Hong Kong
Query!
State/province [1]
0
0
Sha Tin
Query!
Country [2]
0
0
New Zealand
Query!
State/province [2]
0
0
Auckland
Query!
Funding & Sponsors
Primary sponsor type
Commercial sector/industry
Query!
Name
Smith & Nephew, Inc.
Query!
Address
Query!
Country
Query!
Ethics approval
Ethics application status
Query!
Summary
Brief summary
This is a prospective study to demonstrate the safety and effectiveness of CORI and to register CORI in China mainland.
Query!
Trial website
https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT04797897
Query!
Trial related presentations / publications
Query!
Public notes
Query!
Contacts
Principal investigator
Name
0
0
Patricia McCracken
Query!
Address
0
0
Smith & Nephew, Inc.
Query!
Country
0
0
Query!
Phone
0
0
Query!
Fax
0
0
Query!
Email
0
0
Query!
Contact person for public queries
Name
0
0
Manvendra Saxena, PhD
Query!
Address
0
0
Query!
Country
0
0
Query!
Phone
0
0
+61 455 870 175
Query!
Fax
0
0
Query!
Email
0
0
[email protected]
Query!
Contact person for scientific queries
Data sharing statement
Will individual participant data (IPD) for this trial be available (including data dictionaries)?
No
Query!
No/undecided IPD sharing reason/comment
Query!
What supporting documents are/will be available?
No Supporting Document Provided
Type
Other Details
Attachment
Study protocol
https://cdn.clinicaltrials.gov/large-docs/97/NCT04797897/Prot_000.pdf
Statistical analysis plan
https://cdn.clinicaltrials.gov/large-docs/97/NCT04797897/SAP_001.pdf
Results publications and other study-related documents
No documents have been uploaded by study researchers.
Results are available at
https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT04797897
Download to PDF