Costs and Benefits of ConforMIS iTotal® Knee Replacement System Versus Standard Total Knee
|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 evaluated by the U.S. Federal Government. Read our disclaimer for details.|
|ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01899417|
Recruitment Status : Completed
First Posted : July 15, 2013
Last Update Posted : June 19, 2015
Information provided by (Responsible Party):
No Study Results Posted on ClinicalTrials.gov for this Study
|Recruitment Status :||Completed|
|Actual Primary Completion Date :||March 2014|
|Actual Study Completion Date :||March 2014|
Kurtz S, Ong K, Lau E, Mowat F, Halpern M. Projections of primary and revision hip and knee arthroplasty in the United States from 2005 to 2030. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2007 Apr;89(4):780-5.
Rougraff BT, Heck DA, Gibson AE. A comparison of tricompartmental and unicompartmental arthroplasty for the treatment of gonarthrosis. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1991 Dec;(273):157-64.
Fitzpatrick C, FitzPatrick D, Lee J, Auger D. Statistical design of unicompartmental tibial implants and comparison with current devices. Knee. 2007 Mar;14(2):138-44. Epub 2006 Dec 22.
Fitz W. Unicompartmental knee arthroplasty with use of novel patient-specific resurfacing implants and personalized jigs. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2009 Feb;91 Suppl 1:69-76. doi: 10.2106/JBJS.H.01448.
Bourne RB, Chesworth BM, Davis AM, Mahomed NN, Charron KD. Patient satisfaction after total knee arthroplasty: who is satisfied and who is not? Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2010 Jan;468(1):57-63. doi: 10.1007/s11999-009-1119-9.