Dual-mobility Cups Compared to Unipolar Cups on Dislocation and Cost-effectiveness After Primary Total Hip Arthroplasty. (REDEP)
Primary Purpose
Total Hip Arthroplasty, Osteoarthritis, Hip
Status
Recruiting
Phase
Not Applicable
Locations
Netherlands
Study Type
Interventional
Intervention
Unipolar cup
Dual mobility cup
Sponsored by
About this trial
This is an interventional treatment trial for Total Hip Arthroplasty focused on measuring Primary total hip arthroplasty, Dual Mobility cup
Eligibility Criteria
Inclusion Criteria:
- Patients who are eligible for elective primary THA with a cemented cup, with a 32mm or 36 mm liner, for any indication.
- THA using posterolateral surgical approach.
- Patients ≥ 70 years old
- Adequate comprehension of written and spoken Dutch
Exclusion Criteria
- Patients unable to complete PROMs
- Patients with dementia, epilepsy*, spasticity*, mental retardation or alcoholism. (If dementia or mental retardation is not already mentioned in the medical chart, this can be determined by doctors opinion.)
Patients not eligible for either a unipolar or a DM cup
- These patients will be asked to participate in the non-randomized dual mobility observational cohort.
Sites / Locations
- OLVGRecruiting
Arms of the Study
Arm 1
Arm 2
Arm Type
Active Comparator
Active Comparator
Arm Label
unipolar cup
Dual Mobility cup
Arm Description
550 patients will receive a total hip arthroplasty with a unipolar cup.
550 patients will receive a total hip arthroplasty with a dual mobility cup.
Outcomes
Primary Outcome Measures
Number of dislocations
The total number of dislocations, regardless of type of treatment (i.e. closed repositioning or revision).
Secondary Outcome Measures
Number of revision surgeries
Revision surgery of any component for any reason
cost-effectiveness questionnaire
An economic evaluation will be performed from the societal perspective, for dislocation and Quality Adjusted Life Years (QALYs). Prevailing guidelines of Zorginstituut Nederland will be observed. All costs and consequences relevant to THA, hip dislocation and hip revision will be taken into account. To compare costs between groups, confidence intervals around the mean differences in costs at one year after THA will estimated using the bias-corrected and accelerated bootstrap method.
Number of dislocations
Total number of dislocations
Patient Reported Outcomes on physical functioning
Difference in patient reported outcomes on physical functioning following primary THA with a DM cup compared to a unipolar cup, measured with the Hip disability and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score Physical Short form (HOOS-PS). Interval level scores from 0 (no difficulty) to 100 (extreme difficulty).
Patient Reported Outcomes on pain
Difference in patient reported outcomes on pain, following primary THA with a DM cup compared to a unipolar cup, measured with the Numeric Ratin Scale (NRS) for pain in rest and during weight bearing. 0 means no pain, 10 means the most extreme pain.
Patient Reported Outcomes on quality of life
Difference in patient reported outcomes quality of life, following primary THA with a DM cup compared to a unipolar cup, measured with the EuroQol 5 Dimensions (EQ-5D). A higher score means a worse quality of life, a lower score means a better quality of life. For the visual analogue scale (part of the EQ-5D), the lowest means the worst an the highest score means the best health score.
Implant survival
Long-term implant survival based on LROI revision and mortality data.
Full Information
1. Study Identification
Unique Protocol Identification Number
NCT04031820
Brief Title
Dual-mobility Cups Compared to Unipolar Cups on Dislocation and Cost-effectiveness After Primary Total Hip Arthroplasty.
Acronym
REDEP
Official Title
Effectiveness of Dual-mobility Cups for Preventing Dislocation After Primary Total Hip Arthroplasty by a Posterolateral Approach and Their Cost-effectiveness Compared to Unipolar Cups in Elderly Patients.
Study Type
Interventional
2. Study Status
Record Verification Date
January 2022
Overall Recruitment Status
Recruiting
Study Start Date
January 1, 2019 (Actual)
Primary Completion Date
March 1, 2024 (Anticipated)
Study Completion Date
March 1, 2025 (Anticipated)
3. Sponsor/Collaborators
Responsible Party, by Official Title
Sponsor
Name of the Sponsor
JointResearch
4. Oversight
Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated Drug Product
No
Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated Device Product
No
Data Monitoring Committee
Yes
5. Study Description
Brief Summary
Objective: The primary objective is to investigate whether there is a difference in the number of hip dislocations following primary total hip arthroplasty (THA), using the posterolateral approach, with a DM cup compared to a unipolar cup in elderly patients 1 year after surgery.
Study design: Prospective multi-center nation wide, single blinded RCT nested in the LROI.
Study population: Patients ≥ 70 years old, undergoing an elective primary cemented THA.
Detailed Description
Rationale: Dislocation is the leading reason for early revision surgery. To address the problem of dislocation, the dual-mobility (DM) cup was developed in France in the 1970's. This cup should provide more stability and biomechanically reduce the risk of dislocation. In the Netherlands, most DM cups are placed in specific patients, e.g. with cognitive impairment and for revisions due to recurrent dislocations. Despite the increased and, in some countries, broad use of DM cups, high quality evidence of their (cost)effectiveness is lacking. This study aims to perform a trial to fill this gap in knowledge. Much of the information needed to judge the effectiveness of DM cups is already incorporated in the Dutch Arthroplasty Register (LROI). This register lends itself perfectly for a nested RCT towards this aim.
Objective: The primary objective is to investigate whether there is a difference in the number of hip dislocations following primary total hip arthroplasty (THA), using the posterolateral approach, with a DM cup compared to a unipolar cup in elderly patients 1 year after surgery. The secondary objectives are: to investigate whether there is a difference in the number of revisions; to investigate what the cost-effectiveness and cost-utility is of a DM cup compared to a unipolar cup at 1 year follow-up; to investigate whether there is a difference in the number of hip dislocations and revisions between a DM cup and a unipolar cup 2 years after surgery; to investigate whether there is a difference in patient reported outcomes between a DM cup compared to a unipolar cup 1 and 2 years after surgery; to compare the number of hip dislocations, revisions and PROM data between patients in the randomized DM group and patients in an observational cohort DM group. Finally, long-term survival of DM and unipolar cups will be evaluated based on revision and mortality data registered in the LROI.
Study design: Prospective multi-center nation wide, single blinded RCT nested in the LROI.
Study population: Patients ≥ 70 years old, undergoing an elective primary cemented THA.
Intervention (if applicable): The intervention group receives a THA with a dual mobility cup, the control group receives a THA with a unipolar cup.
Main study parameters/endpoints: Primary: The number of dislocations. Secondary: costs, patient reported outcomes and implant survival.
Nature and extent of the burden and risks associated with participation, benefit and group relatedness: In addition to the benefits from regular care, the primary hip arthroplasty procedure, patients might benefit from randomization to receiving a DM cup. DM cups are designed to reduce the risk of hip dislocation, compared to a unipolar cup. Patients may undergo more thorough follow-up than non-study patients and may benefit from this increased surveillance compared with regular care. The only burden associated with study participation is the time needed to complete the cost questionnaires (all other outcomes are part of standard care).
6. Conditions and Keywords
Primary Disease or Condition Being Studied in the Trial, or the Focus of the Study
Total Hip Arthroplasty, Osteoarthritis, Hip
Keywords
Primary total hip arthroplasty, Dual Mobility cup
7. Study Design
Primary Purpose
Treatment
Study Phase
Not Applicable
Interventional Study Model
Parallel Assignment
Masking
Participant
Allocation
Randomized
Enrollment
1100 (Anticipated)
8. Arms, Groups, and Interventions
Arm Title
unipolar cup
Arm Type
Active Comparator
Arm Description
550 patients will receive a total hip arthroplasty with a unipolar cup.
Arm Title
Dual Mobility cup
Arm Type
Active Comparator
Arm Description
550 patients will receive a total hip arthroplasty with a dual mobility cup.
Intervention Type
Procedure
Intervention Name(s)
Unipolar cup
Intervention Description
Cemented unipolar acetabulum cup for primary THA
Intervention Type
Procedure
Intervention Name(s)
Dual mobility cup
Intervention Description
Cemented dual mobility acetabulum cup for primary THA
Primary Outcome Measure Information:
Title
Number of dislocations
Description
The total number of dislocations, regardless of type of treatment (i.e. closed repositioning or revision).
Time Frame
1 year postoperative
Secondary Outcome Measure Information:
Title
Number of revision surgeries
Description
Revision surgery of any component for any reason
Time Frame
1 year postoperative
Title
cost-effectiveness questionnaire
Description
An economic evaluation will be performed from the societal perspective, for dislocation and Quality Adjusted Life Years (QALYs). Prevailing guidelines of Zorginstituut Nederland will be observed. All costs and consequences relevant to THA, hip dislocation and hip revision will be taken into account. To compare costs between groups, confidence intervals around the mean differences in costs at one year after THA will estimated using the bias-corrected and accelerated bootstrap method.
Time Frame
1 year postoperative
Title
Number of dislocations
Description
Total number of dislocations
Time Frame
2 years postoperative
Title
Patient Reported Outcomes on physical functioning
Description
Difference in patient reported outcomes on physical functioning following primary THA with a DM cup compared to a unipolar cup, measured with the Hip disability and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score Physical Short form (HOOS-PS). Interval level scores from 0 (no difficulty) to 100 (extreme difficulty).
Time Frame
1 and 2 years postoperative
Title
Patient Reported Outcomes on pain
Description
Difference in patient reported outcomes on pain, following primary THA with a DM cup compared to a unipolar cup, measured with the Numeric Ratin Scale (NRS) for pain in rest and during weight bearing. 0 means no pain, 10 means the most extreme pain.
Time Frame
1 and 2 years postoperative
Title
Patient Reported Outcomes on quality of life
Description
Difference in patient reported outcomes quality of life, following primary THA with a DM cup compared to a unipolar cup, measured with the EuroQol 5 Dimensions (EQ-5D). A higher score means a worse quality of life, a lower score means a better quality of life. For the visual analogue scale (part of the EQ-5D), the lowest means the worst an the highest score means the best health score.
Time Frame
1 and 2 years postoperative
Title
Implant survival
Description
Long-term implant survival based on LROI revision and mortality data.
Time Frame
5 - 10 years postoperative
10. Eligibility
Sex
All
Minimum Age & Unit of Time
70 Years
Accepts Healthy Volunteers
No
Eligibility Criteria
Inclusion Criteria:
Patients who are eligible for elective primary THA with a cemented cup, with a 32mm or 36 mm liner, for any indication.
THA using posterolateral surgical approach.
Patients ≥ 70 years old
Adequate comprehension of written and spoken Dutch
Exclusion Criteria
Patients unable to complete PROMs
Patients with dementia, epilepsy*, spasticity*, mental retardation or alcoholism. (If dementia or mental retardation is not already mentioned in the medical chart, this can be determined by doctors opinion.)
Patients not eligible for either a unipolar or a DM cup
These patients will be asked to participate in the non-randomized dual mobility observational cohort.
Central Contact Person:
First Name & Middle Initial & Last Name or Official Title & Degree
Loes van Beers, MSc
Phone
+31205993653
Email
l.w.a.h.vanbeers@olvg.nl
First Name & Middle Initial & Last Name or Official Title & Degree
Nienke Willigenburg, PhD
Phone
+31205992415
Email
n.w.willigenburg@olvg.nl
Overall Study Officials:
First Name & Middle Initial & Last Name & Degree
Rudolf Poolman, MD, PhD
Organizational Affiliation
OLVG, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
Official's Role
Principal Investigator
Facility Information:
Facility Name
OLVG
City
Amsterdam
ZIP/Postal Code
1091 AC
Country
Netherlands
Individual Site Status
Recruiting
Facility Contact:
First Name & Middle Initial & Last Name & Degree
Loes van Beers, MSc
Phone
020-5993653
Email
l.w.a.h.vanbeers@olvg.nl
First Name & Middle Initial & Last Name & Degree
Nienke Willigenburg, PhD
Phone
020-5992415
Email
n.w.willigenburg@olvg.nl
12. IPD Sharing Statement
Plan to Share IPD
No
Citations:
PubMed Identifier
32746668
Citation
Van Beers LWAH, Van Der Wal BCH, Van Loon TG, Moojen DJF, Van Wier MF, Klaassen AD, Willigenburg NW, Poolman RW; Collaborator group. Study protocol: Effectiveness of dual-mobility cups compared with uni-polar cups for preventing dislocation after primary total hip arthroplasty in elderly patients - design of a randomized controlled trial nested in the Dutch Arthroplasty Registry. Acta Orthop. 2020 Oct;91(5):514-519. doi: 10.1080/17453674.2020.1798658. Epub 2020 Aug 4.
Results Reference
derived
Learn more about this trial
Dual-mobility Cups Compared to Unipolar Cups on Dislocation and Cost-effectiveness After Primary Total Hip Arthroplasty.
We'll reach out to this number within 24 hrs