[{"data":1,"prerenderedAt":-1},["ShallowReactive",2],{"health-studies-list:{\"overallStatus\":[\"RECRUITING\",\"AVAILABLE\",\"NOT_YET_RECRUITING\"],\"leadSponsorName\":\"Reinier Haga Orthopedisch Centrum\",\"orderBy\":\"LastUpdateSubmitDate:desc\",\"size\":25,\"offset\":0}":3,"health-study-condition:":204},{"pageToken":4,"total":5,"offset":6,"count":5,"results":7},null,7,0,[8,44,72,99,129,156,180],{"id":9,"slug":10,"hasResults":11,"nctId":12,"briefTitle":13,"officialTitle":13,"acronym":14,"eligibilityCriteria":15,"healthyVolunteers":11,"sex":16,"minAge":17,"maxAge":4,"enrollmentInfo":18,"targetDuration":4,"studyType":21,"phases":22,"briefSummary":24,"conditions":25,"keywords":28,"overallStatus":31,"whyStopped":4,"lastUpdateSubmitDate":32,"lastUpdatePostDateStruct":33,"startDateStruct":36,"completionDateStruct":38,"leadSponsor":40,"locationsCount":43},"100598367","haka-routine-follow-up-at-10-years-after-hip--or-knee-arthroplasty-wasting-resources-or-appropriate-healthcare-100598367",false,"NCT07070570","HAKA: Routine Follow-up at 10 Years After Hip- or Knee Arthroplasty: Wasting Resources or Appropriate Healthcare?","HAKA 10 years","Inclusion Criteria:\n\n* Underwent primary THA or TKA approximately 10 years ago\n* Age 50 years or older at time of THA or TKA\n* Capable and willing to complete questionnaires (when applicable)\n* Understanding Dutch or English\n* Willing to provide written informed consent in case the patient will complete questionnaires\n\nExclusion Criteria:\n\n* Other indication for surgery than osteoarthritis\n* Deceased\n* Revision arthroplasty of hip or knee, except a conversion from unicompartmental knee arthroplasty to TKA or from hip hemiarthroplasty\u002Fresurfacing to THA\n* Already participating in this study due to another hip or knee surgery","ALL","50 Years",{"count":19,"type":20},1500,"ESTIMATED","INTERVENTIONAL",[23],"NA","After undergoing total hip or total knee arthroplasty, current guidelines recommend routine follow-up with an X-ray within 3 months and again at 1 year. Follow-up at 5 years (for hip arthroplasties) or every 5 years (for knee arthroplasties) is also considered worthwhile according to the guideline. However, these follow-up appointments require considerable time from patients, caregivers, and healthcare professionals, and it is unclear whether they are truly beneficial. It is possible that a single follow-up within 3 months is sufficient. This could potentially prevent over 100,000 unnecessary hospital visits per year, resulting in significant cost savings. If patients or healthcare providers have concerns, they can always request an additional follow-up.\n\nThe HAKA trial consists of three different work packages (WPs). This trial (WP2) investigates the 10-year follow-up, WP1 examines the 1-year follow-up, and WP3 is a qualitative study exploring the experiences and perceptions of patients and healthcare professionals. The aim of the HAKA trial is to safely reduce routine follow-up appointments after total hip or knee arthroplasty and to revise current clinical guidelines accordingly.",[26,27],"Hip Arthroplasty, Total","Knee Arthroplasty, Total",[29,30],"Routine follow-up","Check-up on demand","NOT_YET_RECRUITING","2025-07-14",{"date":34,"type":35},"2025-07-17","ACTUAL",{"date":37,"type":20},"2025-09-01",{"date":39,"type":20},"2029-12-31",{"name":41,"class":42},"Reinier Haga Orthopedisch Centrum","OTHER",1,{"id":45,"slug":46,"hasResults":11,"nctId":47,"briefTitle":48,"officialTitle":48,"acronym":49,"eligibilityCriteria":50,"healthyVolunteers":11,"sex":16,"minAge":51,"maxAge":4,"enrollmentInfo":52,"targetDuration":4,"studyType":54,"phases":4,"briefSummary":55,"conditions":56,"keywords":58,"overallStatus":63,"whyStopped":4,"lastUpdateSubmitDate":64,"lastUpdatePostDateStruct":65,"startDateStruct":67,"completionDateStruct":69,"leadSponsor":71,"locationsCount":43},"100566374","short-term-recovery-after-trapeziectomy-and-tmc-prosthesis-a-diary-study-100566374","NCT06654349","Short-term Recovery After Trapeziectomy and TMC Prosthesis: a Diary Study","THUMB Diary","Inclusion Criteria:\n\n* Failed conservative treatment for osteoarthritis\n* Planned for trapeziectomy or TMC-joint arthroplasty\n* Age 18-75 years\n* Willing and able to comply with the postoperative functional assessment and to participate in a rehabilitation schedule\n\nExclusion Criteria:\n\n* Mentally disabled patients\n* Active infection\n* Current malignancy\n* Infiltration (corticoids \\\u003C 3 months)\n\nThe following criteria is specific for the TMC-joint arthroplasty group and is an addition to the criteria mentioned above:\n\n* Trapezium height \\\u003C 8 mm","18 Years",{"count":53,"type":20},200,"OBSERVATIONAL","Rationale: The trapeziometacarpal (TMC) joint is one of the most common areas in the hand and wrist to develop osteoarthritis (OA). Currently, the two most widely used procedures are the trapeziectomy and the TMC-joint arthroplasty, both with their own pros and cons. No studies have demonstrated superiority of TMC-joint arthroplasty over gold-standard trapeziectomy. And no clinical studies show short-term recovery and patient experience after trapeziectomy or TMC-joint arthroplasty.\n\nObjective: To gather insight in short-term recovery and patient experience after a trapeziectomy or TMC prosthesis regarding pain, pain medication, function and quality of life.\n\nStudy design: A prospective observational cohort diary study.\n\nStudy population: In total 200 subjects with TMC-joint osteoarthritis will participate: 100 subjects will have trapeziectomy and 100 subjects will have TMC-joint arthroplasty\n\nMain study parameters\u002Fendpoints: The main study parameters are the pain, function and quality of life during the first 8 weeks after surgery.\n\nNature and extent of the burden and risks associated with participation, benefit and group relatedness: Subjects will have no direct benefit from participation in this study. Subjects will only complete a diary and questionnaires for this study. Therefore, we expect no risks from participation. The burden for subjects consists of approximately five minutes daily for the diary in the first eight weeks after surgery.",[57],"Arthrosis of First Carpometacarpal Joint",[59,60,61,62],"Trapeziectomy","Diary","TMC-arthroplasty","Osteoarthrosis","RECRUITING","2025-05-20",{"date":66,"type":35},"2025-05-21",{"date":68,"type":35},"2025-05-15",{"date":70,"type":20},"2030-12-31",{"name":41,"class":42},{"id":73,"slug":74,"hasResults":11,"nctId":75,"briefTitle":76,"officialTitle":77,"acronym":78,"eligibilityCriteria":79,"healthyVolunteers":80,"sex":16,"minAge":4,"maxAge":4,"enrollmentInfo":81,"targetDuration":82,"studyType":54,"phases":4,"briefSummary":83,"conditions":84,"keywords":89,"overallStatus":63,"whyStopped":4,"lastUpdateSubmitDate":91,"lastUpdatePostDateStruct":92,"startDateStruct":94,"completionDateStruct":96,"leadSponsor":98,"locationsCount":43},"100584136","ototoxicity-in-patients-with-mom-hip-bearings-100584136","NCT06885411","Ototoxicity in Patients With MoM Hip Bearings","Ototixicity in Patients With a Metal-on-Metal Hip Arthroplasty","GODMOTHER","Inclusion Criteria:\n\n* all MoM patients from the different clinics\n* revision MoM\n* willing to participate\n* speak\u002Fwrite the Dutch language\n\nExclusion Criteria:\n\n* Not willing to participate\n* previous ENT surgery or ENT pathology",true,{"count":53,"type":20},"1 Day","The goal of this observational study is to learn about ototoxicity in patients with a MoM hip arthroplasty. The main question it aims to answer is:\n\n• What is the prevalence of hearing loss in patients with high and low plasma metal concentrations.",[85,86,87,88],"Ototoxic Hearing Loss","Cobalt Poisoning","Chromium Causing Toxic Effect","Arthroplasty Complications",[90],"Metal-on-Metal implant; Cobalt; Chromium; Hip arthroplasty; auditory system; Otoxicity","2025-03-17",{"date":93,"type":35},"2025-03-20",{"date":95,"type":35},"2023-02-01",{"date":97,"type":20},"2025-12-01",{"name":41,"class":42},{"id":100,"slug":101,"hasResults":11,"nctId":102,"briefTitle":103,"officialTitle":104,"acronym":4,"eligibilityCriteria":105,"healthyVolunteers":11,"sex":16,"minAge":51,"maxAge":4,"enrollmentInfo":106,"targetDuration":4,"studyType":21,"phases":108,"briefSummary":109,"conditions":110,"keywords":112,"overallStatus":63,"whyStopped":4,"lastUpdateSubmitDate":121,"lastUpdatePostDateStruct":122,"startDateStruct":124,"completionDateStruct":126,"leadSponsor":128,"locationsCount":43},"100537280","hip-stitch-wound-recovery-after-tha-100537280","NCT06275776","HIP-STITCH (Wound Recovery After THA)","The Effect of Suturing Techniques on Aberrant Wound Recovery After Total Hip Arthroplasty","Inclusion Criteria:\n\n* Eighteen years or older.\n* Scheduled to undergo Total Hip Arthroplasty via the anterior approach for any indication at the RHOC.\n* No prior operations to the hip which is to be operated on.\n* A good command of the Dutch language\n* Able to give written informed consent.\n\nExclusion Criteria:\n\n* Usage of cytostatics in the period ranging from fourteen days prior, to ninety days after the operation.\n* Unable to, or difficulty with communicating in the Dutch language (e.g. due to mental disability, inability to understand\u002Fspeak\u002Fwrite Dutch, et cetera).",{"count":107,"type":20},236,[23],"This prospective randomised trial will investigate the effect of four different suturing techniques (Monocryl, Vicryl Rapide with Indermil skin glue, Dermabond Prineo, and Stryker Zip) on the amount of aberrant wound recovery within 14 days after total hip arthroplasty at the RHOC in Zoetermeer, The Netherlands.\n\nThis will be done by assessing photographs of the plaster and photographs of the operation wound with a self-developed classification model. The photographs of the plaster will be taken by the test subject at home at 3 days and 11 days postoperatively.\n\nThe photographs of the operation wound will be taken by a member of the research team, and the doctor's assistant, respectively, during a visit to the outpatient clinic at 7 days and 14 days postoperatively.\n\nHypothesis: Monocryl sutures give the highest amount of aberrant wound recovery within fourteen days after primary THA.",[111],"Wound Healing Disturbance of",[113,114,115,116,117,118,119,120],"Aberrant wound recovery","Total Hip Arthroplasty","Anterior approach","Monocryl Smooth Suture","Vicryl Rapide Braided Suture","Indermil Topical Skin Adhesive","Dermabond Prineo Skin Closure System","Stryker Zip Skin Closure System","2024-10-21",{"date":123,"type":35},"2024-10-24",{"date":125,"type":35},"2024-08-28",{"date":127,"type":20},"2028-05-01",{"name":41,"class":42},{"id":130,"slug":131,"hasResults":11,"nctId":132,"briefTitle":133,"officialTitle":134,"acronym":135,"eligibilityCriteria":136,"healthyVolunteers":11,"sex":16,"minAge":51,"maxAge":137,"enrollmentInfo":138,"targetDuration":4,"studyType":21,"phases":140,"briefSummary":141,"conditions":142,"keywords":145,"overallStatus":63,"whyStopped":4,"lastUpdateSubmitDate":148,"lastUpdatePostDateStruct":149,"startDateStruct":151,"completionDateStruct":153,"leadSponsor":155,"locationsCount":43},"100511219","migration-of-cs-vs-cr-insert-in-tka-using-rsa-100511219","NCT05936593","Migration of CS vs CR Insert in TKA Using RSA","Migration in a Cruciate Retaining and a Condylar Stabilizing Insert of a Robot-assisted Uncemented Total Knee Prosthesis Using Model-based RSA: a Mono-Center Randomized Controlled Trial With 10 Years Follow-up","CS vs CR RSA","Inclusion Criteria:\n\n* Patients scheduled to undergo primary total knee replacement with the MAKO-robotic arm, with one of the following indications:\n* Painful, disabling joint disease of the knee resulting from: non-inflammatory degenerative joint disease (including osteoarthritis, traumatic arthritis or avascular necrosis) or rheumatoid arthritis.\n* One or more compartments are involved;\n* Moderate varus, valgus, or flexion deformity in which the ligamentous structures can be returned to adequate function and stability (meaning a varus, valgus or flexion deformity \\\u003C 15 degrees);\n* Age between 18 and 70 years;\n* ASA score I or II;\n* A good nutritional state of the patient;\n* Patients with a completely intact PCL at the time of surgery;\n* Patient is able to understand the study and is willing to participate and to sign the Informed Consent;\n* Patient is able to speak and write Dutch.\n\nExclusion Criteria:\n\n* Contraindications manufacturer:\n* Any active or suspected latent infection in or about the knee joint;\n* Distant foci of infection which may cause hematogenous spread to the implant site;\n* Any mental or neuromuscular disorder which would create an unacceptable risk of prosthesis instability, prosthesis fixation failure, or complications in postoperative care;\n* Bone stock compromised by disease, infection or prior implantation which cannot provide adequate support and\u002For fixation to the prosthesis;\n* Skeletal immaturity;\n* Severe instability of the knee joint secondary to the absence of collateral ligament integrity and function;\n* Metal in the operative or non-operative leg which lead to the creation of accuracy-reducing artefacts in the CT scan;\n* Body Mass Index (BMI) of \\> 35 kg\u002Fm2;\n* Flexion contracture of 15 degrees and more;\n* Varus\u002Fvalgus contracture of 15 degrees and more;\n* History of total or unicompartmental reconstruction of the affected joint;\n* Bilateral operation;\n* A Total Hip Arthroplasty (THA) on contralateral and\u002For ipsilateral side within the last year that is considered to have an unsatisfactory outcome (Patients with contralateral and\u002For ipsilateral THA \\> 1 year ago with good outcome can be included in the study);\n* A Total Knee Arthroplasty (TKA) on contralateral side within the last 6 months that is considered to have an unsatisfactory outcome. (Patients with contralateral TKA \\> 6 months ago with good outcome can be included in the study);\n* Patients who will need lower limb joint replacement for another joint within one year.\n* Active or suspected latent infection in or about the knee joint;\n* Osteomyelitis;\n* Sepsis;\n* A systemic or metabolic disorder leading to progressive bone deterioration, excluding rheumatoid arthritis;\n* Vascular insufficiency, muscular atrophy;\n* Neuromuscular or neurosensory deficiency, which would limit the ability to assess the performance of the device;\n* Female patients planning a pregnancy during the course of the study;\n* The patient is immunologically suppressed or receiving steroids in excess of normal physiological requirements.\n* Patients bone stock is compromised by disease or infection which cannot provide adequate support and\u002For fixation to the prosthesis;\n* A knee fusion to the affected joint;\n* Patient has a known or suspected sensitivity or allergy to one or more of the implant materials;","70 Years",{"count":139,"type":20},44,[23],"Background:\n\nThe choice whether or not to preserve the posterior cruciate ligament (PCL) in total knee arthroplasty (TKA) is coupled to the us of a PCL-retaining (CR) or a condylar (CS) insert. The CS insert is anterior-lipped (AL) to prevent anterior translation of the femur on the tibia with flexion and compensate the function of the PCL. Currently both the CR and CS insert are made of highly cross-linked polyethylene (HXPLE) to theoretically reduce wear related osteolysis. However, this also might diminish the fracture toughness and crack propagation of the insert. The investigators expect that due to the high contact forces on the anterior lip of the CS insert during flexion, especially in younger and more active patients, and the lower fracture toughness of HXPLE, the CS insert insert might show more migration, wear or other damage compared to the CR insert in the long-term, which might lead to more revisions in the CS insert compared to the CR insert.\n\nTo measure the migration and wear, during surgery tantalum markers will be inserted in the host bone using a marker inserter. The displacement of the prosthesis with reference to the host bone will be measured using model-based RSA. Both tantalum markers ande the inserter are already used for study purposes. However, the safety and usability are not registered before.\n\nObjective:\n\nThe primary objective is to compare the migration of both the femoral and tibial component by the use of a CS insert or CR insert both made of HXPLE using model-based roentgen stereophotogrammetric analysis (mRSA). Furthermore, the safety and usability of the tantalum markers and the marker inserter will be determined. The secondary objective is to determine the influence of the type of insert on the wear, inducible displacement, survival and clinical outcomes.\n\nStudy design:\n\nA randomized controlled trial\n\nStudy population:\n\nForty-four patients scheduled to undergo primary total knee replacement, aged below 70 years with an ASA-score of 1 or 2 will be needed in total, divided in two groups of 22 patients each.\n\nIntervention:\n\nOne group receives an uncemented TKP with a CS insert, while the other group receives an uncemented TKP with a CR insert. Both will be placed using the MAKO-robotic arm using a kinematic balancing technique.\n\nOutcomes:\n\nMain study parameters are migration of the femoral and tibial components measured with model-based RSA software till 10 years postoperatively. Furthermore, the stability of the markers will be determined and the complications due to the markers and\u002For the marker inserter will be registered. The secondary parameters are wear, inducible displacement, survival, clinical outcomes and complications up to 10 years postoperatively.",[143,144],"Wear of Articular Bearing Surface of Prosthetic Joint","Migration of Implant",[146,147],"Total knee arthroplasty","Insert","2023-12-12",{"date":150,"type":35},"2023-12-18",{"date":152,"type":35},"2023-07-21",{"date":154,"type":20},"2035-06",{"name":41,"class":42},{"id":157,"slug":158,"hasResults":11,"nctId":159,"briefTitle":160,"officialTitle":161,"acronym":162,"eligibilityCriteria":163,"healthyVolunteers":11,"sex":16,"minAge":51,"maxAge":4,"enrollmentInfo":164,"targetDuration":4,"studyType":54,"phases":4,"briefSummary":166,"conditions":167,"keywords":169,"overallStatus":63,"whyStopped":4,"lastUpdateSubmitDate":172,"lastUpdatePostDateStruct":173,"startDateStruct":175,"completionDateStruct":177,"leadSponsor":179,"locationsCount":43},"100476450","capflex-pip-implant-rsa-100476450","NCT05484089","CapFlex PIP Implant RSA","Migration of the CapFlex-PIP Implant System for Proximal Interphalangeal Joint Arthroplasty: a 10 Year Follow up RSA Study","Capflex RSA","Inclusion Criteria:\n\n* Indication for PIP joint arthroplasty as described in the manufacturer's guideline, namely as a result of:\n\n  * Painful osteoarthritis\n  * Instable communitive intra-articular PIP fractures\n* Age \\> 18 years\n* Patient is able to speak and write Dutch\n* Patient is willing to participate\n* Patient is able and willing to provide written informed consent\n\nExclusion Criteria:\n\n* Inflammatory arthritis with significant bone loss\n* Insufficient bone quality to provide adequate stability\n* Known or suspected sensitivity or allergy to one or more of the implant materials\n* Revision surgery\n* Significant collateral instability\n* Pregnancy or breastfeeding",{"count":165,"type":20},36,"Rationale: Patients with osteoarthrtis (OA) of the proximal interphalangeal (PIP) joint are commonly treated with joint arthroplasty. The CapFlex PIP implant is a modular surface replacing implant, which has good short-term functional results with a relatively low complication rate. To reduce implant failure and to increase long-term survival, it is important to expand knowledge about fixation and loosening patterns. By using model-based roentgen stereogrammaetric analysis (mRSA), the migration pattern of the implant over time can be calculated.\n\nObjective: The primary objective is to assess the fixation and migration patterns of the CapFlex PIP implant system (produced and developed by several companies of KLS Martin Group) in vivo, using mRSA, over 10 years. Secondary objectives are to analyse survival, clinical scores and radiographic aspects of the CapFlex PIP implant system.\n\nStudy design: A prospective cohort study with 10 years follow-up, in which 36 patients will be enrolled. Patients will be evaluated preoperatively, at 6 weeks, 6 months, 1 year, 2 years 5 years and 10 years.\n\nStudy population: Patients 18 years or older who require a proximal interphalangeal joint arthroplasty as a result of osteoarthritis of a proximal interphalangeal joint.\n\nMain study parameters\u002Fendpoints: The main study parameters are the migration of the CapFlex PIP implant system of the distal as well as the proximal component (presented in x-, y- and z-direction). Secondary study parameters are the survival of the CapFlex PIP implant system, clinical scores and radiographic aspects.\n\nNature and extent of the burden and risks associated with participation, benefit and group relatedness: Patients participating in the study will have the same risks when not participating in the study. Patients are asked to spend time to fill in the questionnaires and to have 3 extra visits to the hospital, next to the standard visits. Patients will have more follow up visits and will be followed using RSA analysis, which has as advantage that possible complications might be noticed earlier compared to normal follow up.",[168],"Osteoarthritis Hand",[170,171],"RSA","Osteoarthritis","2023-10-27",{"date":174,"type":35},"2023-10-31",{"date":176,"type":35},"2023-10-25",{"date":178,"type":20},"2035-10",{"name":41,"class":42},{"id":181,"slug":182,"hasResults":11,"nctId":183,"briefTitle":184,"officialTitle":185,"acronym":4,"eligibilityCriteria":186,"healthyVolunteers":11,"sex":16,"minAge":51,"maxAge":4,"enrollmentInfo":187,"targetDuration":4,"studyType":54,"phases":4,"briefSummary":189,"conditions":190,"keywords":192,"overallStatus":31,"whyStopped":4,"lastUpdateSubmitDate":196,"lastUpdatePostDateStruct":197,"startDateStruct":199,"completionDateStruct":201,"leadSponsor":203,"locationsCount":4},"100471369","rsa-restoris-multicompartmental-knee-100471369","NCT05417984","RSA Restoris MultiCompartmental Knee","Migration of the Restoris MultiCompartmental Knee Implant System in Robotic-assisted Unicompartmental Kneearthroplasty: a 5 Year Follow up RSA Study","Inclusion Criteria:\n\n* Indication for medial unicompartmental knee replacement as described in the manufacturer's guideline, namely as a result of moderately disabling joint disease of the knee resulting from:\n\n  * Painful osteo- or post-traumatic arthritis\n  * As an alternative to tibial osteotomy\n* Age \\> 18 years\n* Patient qualified for UKP based on physical exam and medical history\n* Patient is able to speak and write Dutch\n* Patient is willing to participate\n* Patient is able and willing to provide written informed consent\n\nExclusion Criteria:\n\n* Contraindication as described by the manufacturer:\n\n  * Inflammatory arthritis or tricompartmental disease\n  * Greater than 10 degrees of hyperextension\n  * Greater than 10 degrees of varus or valgus deformity\n  * Presence of infection (including history of infection), acute or chronic, local or systematic\n  * Either mental or neuromuscular disorders that do not allow control of the knee joint\n  * Insufficient bone stock to allow appropriate insertion and fixation of the prosthesis\n  * Insufficient soft tissue integrity to provide adequate stability\n  * Insufficient articulation of the hip joint\n* Metal in the operative or non-operative leg which lead to the creation of accuracy-reducing artefacts in the CT scan\n* Insufficient bone quality to provide adequate stability\n* Loss of ligament structures to prevent creation of an ideal intra-operative plan\n* Patients has a known or suspected sensitivity or allergy to one or more of the implant materials\n* Revision UKP surgery of the same compartment",{"count":188,"type":20},33,"Patients with isolated medial compartment arthritis of the knee are commonly treated with unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA). In contrast with total knee arthroplasty (TKA), UKA shows a higher revision rate, which might be due to implant malpositioning and postoperative malalignment of the lower limb and incorrect soft tissue balancing. Nowadays, robotic-assisted UKA is used which improves accurate positioning, optimizes soft-tissue balancing and optimizes radiographic alignment of the implant. The potential benefit could be that this better alignment and positioning results in improved functional outcome and long-term survivorship. As there is a lack in long-term results, more research is needed to the long-term results of robotic-assisted UKA. As long-term results are related to early migration of the implant, investigating the early migration will have additional value to predict the long-term results of robotic-assisted UKA. In this study, we will investigate the early migration of a unicompartmental knee implant (Restoris MultiCompartmental Knee Implant System (Restoris MCK)) used in robotic-assisted UKA using model-based roentgen stereogrammetric analysis (mRSA) and we will relate the migration of this implant to the long-term results of the implant.\n\nThe primary objective is to assess the fixation and migration patterns of the Restoris MutliCompartmental Knee Implant System (Stryker) in vivo, using mRSA, over 5 years. Secondary objectives are to analyse survival, clinical scores and radiographic aspects of the Restoris MultiCompartmental Knee Implant System (Stryker) and to relate these to the migration patterns over 5 years.\n\nA prospective cohort study with 5 years follow-up, in which 33 patients will be enrolled. Patients 18 years or older who require a unicompartmental knee prosthesis as a result of moderately disabling joint disease of the knee will be included. During surgery tantalum markers will be placed to be able to perform mRSA. Patients will be evaluated preoperatively, at 6 weeks, 6 months, 1 year, 2 years and 5 years.\n\nThe main study parameters are the migration of the Restoris MCK of both the tibial and femoral component presented in x-, y- and z-direction. Secondary study parameters are the alignment, survival of the Restoris MCK, clinical scores and radiographic aspects (both x-ray and CT scan).",[191],"Osteoarthritis, Knee",[193,194,195],"Unicompartimental knee arthroplasty","Robotic-assisted knee replacement","Migration","2022-06-10",{"date":198,"type":35},"2022-06-14",{"date":200,"type":20},"2022-06",{"date":202,"type":20},"2029-06",{"name":41,"class":42},""]