Skip to main content
OpenTrials
Not Yet Recruiting

NCT Number: NCT07030049

Comparing Articular Noise and Its Perception Between Two Different Types of Individualized Total Knee Arthroplasty

Knee osteoarthritis is a degenerative joint disorder leading to pain and limited movement. Total knee arthroplasty (TKA) has transformed the treatment of knee osteoarthritis, resulting in long-term outcomes that enhance the quality of life for patients. Some individuals report experiencing noise after undergoing TKA. However, there are few randomized controlled trials that assess postoperative noise following the procedure. Additionally, no research has been conducted on individualized TKA, which involves custom-made prostheses tailored to a patient's knee shape. This study aimed to compare the incidence of noise reported by patients who undergo a primary individualized TKA using either cruciate-retaining or posterior-stabilized designs.

Not Yet Recruiting

Trial opening soon.

Get Notified

Key information

Age range

18 year and older

Sex eligibility

All sexes

Study type

Interventional

Phase

Not applicable

About this study

Articular noise is common after total knee arthroplasty (TKA), yet there is ongoing debate regarding its effect on postoperative outcomes, joint awareness and patient satisfaction. A comparative study on articular noise in 50 patients undergoing bilateral TKA using two different prosthesis designs reported that an ultra-congruent design generated less noise than a posterior-stabilized design (18% compared with 38%; p= 0.026), but there were no differences in patient preference, satisfaction, or Forgotten Joint Score (FJS) at two-year follow-up. A retrospective analysis of 160 robot-assisted and 320 conventional TKA revealed no difference in the prevalence of articular noise (40.7% vs 38.1%; p=0.647), but patients who complained of noise had lower FJS (45.5 vs 66.1; p<0.001) and lower Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Score Joint Replacement (KOOS-JR) scores (72.0 vs 81.4; p<0.001) at one-year follow-up.

Recent advancements have shifted medicine from standardised approaches to personalised or precision medicine, tailoring treatments and decisions for individual patients based on their specific responses and risk factors. Individualized TKA adapts features to align with pre-arthritic anatomy and restore native movement, often utilising various tools. Recent studies on individualized TKA have demonstrated promising outcomes regarding personalised coronal alignment targets, correction of extra-articular deformities, intra-operative workflow, accommodation of the third compartment, and patient satisfaction rates.

This study will compare a posterior-stabilised (PS) and a cruciate-retaining (CR) individualized TKA implant. The PS implant is selected for patients with a damaged or a non-functional posterior cruciate ligament. In this case, the ligament is removed and substituted with a post-cam mechanism that aids femoral rollback during knee flexion and avoids anterior femoral subluxation. In contrast, the CR implant design can be selected for patients with an intact and functional posterior cruciate ligament. In this case, the ligament is retained, allowing it to guide femoral rollback and prevent anterior subluxation.

Who can participate

Healthy volunteers accepted: No

Only the study team can determine whether someone qualifies for participation.

Inclusion criteria

Adult patients:

  • receiving elective primary TKA as a treatment for osteoarthritis
  • with an intact and functional posterior cruciate ligament
  • with no previous knee surgery, on the ipsi- or contra-lateral knee
  • who signed the informed consent and are willing to comply with the protocol requirements based on the investigator's judgment.
  • affiliated with a social security scheme
  • with an ability to answer questionnaires and to communicate freely in French.

Exclusion criteria

Patients:

  • that underwent previous knee surgery, except arthroscopic surgery, on their ipsilateral knee
  • with coronal deformities >20°
  • that are pregnant
  • any contraindication mentioned in the instructions for use of the medical devices under investigation
  • with protected status under articles L1121-6, LL121-8 and L1122-2 of the French Public Health Code
  • with other significant disease or disorder which, in the opinion of the investigating surgeon, may put the participant at risk because of participation in the study, or may influence the result of the study
  • who cannot comply with the protocol requirements based on the investigator's judgment.

Treatment and study plan

Postero-stabilized total knee replacement for knee osteoarthritis

Device

Total knee arthroplasty in which the osteoarthritic knee is replaced with a postero-stabilized total knee replacement. The postero-stabilized TKA consists of a femoral component with a build-in cam mechanism and a tibial component with a post-mechanism.

Cruciate-retaining total knee replacement for knee osteoarthritis

Device

Total knee arthroplasty in which the osteoarthritic knee is replaced with a cruciate-retaining total knee replacement. The cruciate-retaining TKA consists of a femoral component and a tibial component that leaves the posterior cruciate ligament intact.

Primary outcomes

  1. Do you hear noise originating from your knee?

    Time frame: 2 years

    The surgeon will ask the blind participant whether they hear articular noise originating from their knee two years after TKA.

Secondary outcomes

  1. Do you feel noise?

    Time frame: 1 & 2 years

    The surgeon will ask the blind participant whether they feel articular noise originating from their knee.

  2. Is the noise a concern or causing discomfort?

    Time frame: 1 & 2 years

    The surgeon will ask the blind participant whether the articular noise originating from their knee is a concern or causing discomfort.

  3. What kind of noise do you hear of feel?

    Time frame: 1 & 2 years

    The surgeon will ask the blind participant what kind articular noise originating from their knee (clunk, crepitus, grinding, clicking, other).

  4. What part of the knee is involved?

    Time frame: 1 & 2 years

    The surgeon will ask the blind participant to identify which part of the knee is involved if they hear articular noise originating from their knee.

  5. What is the impact of the noise on your quality of life, on a scale from 0 (none) to 10 (severe)?

    Time frame: 1 & 2 years

    The surgeon will ask the blind participant how their quality of life is affected by the articular noise originating from their knee.

Other outcomes

  1. Forgotten Joint Score (FJS)

    Time frame: 1 & 2 years

    Patients will complete the 12-item forgotten joint score questionnaire. Scale: 0 (worst) to 100 (best)

  2. Western Ontario et McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC)

    Time frame: 1 & 2 years

    Patients will complete the WOMAC questionnaire (3 domains: pain, stiffness and physical function). Scale: 0 (best) to 96 (worst).

  3. Range of motion.

    Time frame: 1 & 2 years

    Clinical evaluation of knee mobility, using measurements of maximum flexion, flexion contracture (FC) and total range of motion (RoM) pre- and post-operatively.

  4. Pain assessment using the numeric scale

    Time frame: 1 & 2 years

    Pain assessment on a numeric scale from 0 to 10.

  5. Patient satisfaction

    Time frame: 1 & 2 years

    Patient satisfaction assessed using 5-point Likert scale (very satisfied, satisfied, neutral, dissatisfied, very dissatisfied).

  6. Patient quality of life (QoL)

    Time frame: 1 & 2 years

    Patient QoL using the EQ-5D-5L questionnaire. Scale: -0.59 (worst) to 1.0 (best)

  7. Analysis of adverse events

    Time frame: 0 to 2 years

    Analysis of adverse events: incidence, severity, and relationship to the medical device.

Study contacts

Contact information is provided by the study sponsor or research team.

Johanne Beuvelot Beuvelot, PhD

CONTACT

[email protected]

0033 67623373

Sponsors and collaborators

Lead sponsor

Clinique Trenel

Other

Collaborators

  • ProSurg

Registry information

Official study title

Monocentric, Randomized Study, Comparing Articular Noise and Its Perception Between Two Different Types of Individualized Total Knee Arthroplasty

Acronym: ANIKA

Important dates

Study start
2025
Primary completion
2028
Study completion
2028
First posted
Jun 19, 2025
Registry last updated
Jun 26, 2025

OpenTrials presents study information sourced from ClinicalTrials.gov. The official registry record should be consulted for the latest information.

View the official ClinicalTrials.gov record (opens in a new tab)

This listing is for discovery and informational purposes only. It is not medical advice, does not guarantee that a study is recruiting, and does not determine eligibility. Contact the study team and a qualified healthcare professional when considering participation.

Published trials that share one or more normalized conditions with this study.