[{"data":1,"prerenderedAt":-1},["ShallowReactive",2],{"health-studies-list:{\"conditionNormalized\":\"hip-osteoarthritis\",\"overallStatus\":[\"RECRUITING\",\"AVAILABLE\",\"NOT_YET_RECRUITING\"],\"orderBy\":\"LastUpdateSubmitDate:desc\",\"size\":25,\"offset\":0}":3,"health-study-condition:hip-osteoarthritis":28},{"pageToken":4,"total":5,"offset":6,"count":7,"results":8},null,50,0,25,[9,46,71,90,108,145,170,203,227,252,271,289,305,329,348,376,406,437,462,480,496,517,539,558,578],{"id":10,"slug":11,"hasResults":12,"nctId":13,"briefTitle":14,"officialTitle":15,"acronym":4,"eligibilityCriteria":16,"healthyVolunteers":17,"sex":18,"minAge":19,"maxAge":4,"enrollmentInfo":20,"targetDuration":4,"studyType":23,"phases":24,"briefSummary":26,"conditions":27,"keywords":29,"overallStatus":33,"whyStopped":4,"lastUpdateSubmitDate":34,"lastUpdatePostDateStruct":35,"startDateStruct":38,"completionDateStruct":40,"leadSponsor":42,"locationsCount":45},"100053558","prospective-catalystem-ct-rsa-100053558",false,"NCT07698717","Prospective Catalystem CT-RSA","Multi-center, Non-controlled, Prospective CT-based Radiostereometric Analysis of Catalystem Primary Hip System","Inclusion Criteria:\n\n1. Patient requires primary unilateral THA for a severely painful and\u002For disabled joint from osteoarthritis, traumatic arthritis, rheumatoid arthritis, avascular necrosis, or congenital dysplasia.\n2. Patients is at least 21 years old at the time of informed consent.\n3. Patient is able to read and comprehend the informed patient consent document and willing and able to provide informed patient consent for participation in the study and have authorized the transfer of his\u002Fher information for study purposes.\n4. Patient is able and willing to return for follow-up as specified by the study protocol.\n5. Patient is able and willing to complete the required questionnaires and patient-completed portions of the study protocol.\n\nExclusion Criteria:\n\n1. Patient requires implants other than the planned components or would not be a candidate for allowable components to be used (see 4) in the judgement of the surgeon.\n2. Patient is planned to have simultaneous bilateral hip arthroplasty\n3. Patient had contralateral hip arthroplasty less than 6 months prior to the day of surgery.\n4. Patient is expected to have contralateral hip arthroplasty in the following 6 months at the time of consent into this study.\n5. Patient has active local or systemic infection.\n6. Patient has amputations in either leg that would impact rehabilitation following surgery.\n7. Patient has loss of musculature, neuromuscular compromise or vascular compromise that would impact rehabilitation following surgery.\n8. Patient has poor bone quality, such as osteoporosis, where in the surgeon's opinion, there could be considerable migration of the prosthesis, or require additional fixation, or a significant chance of periprosthetic fracture, or the lack of adequate bone to support the implant(s).\n9. Patient has Charcot's or Paget's disease.\n10. Patient is pregnant or lactating.\n11. Patient is bedridden.\n12. Patient has participated in a clinical investigation with an investigational product (drug or device) in the last 3 months.\n13. Patient is currently involved in any personal injury litigation, medical-legal or worker's compensation claims.\n14. Patients is, in the opinion of the surgeon, a drug or alcohol abuser or has psychological disorder(s) that could affect their ability to complete patient-reported questionnaires or be compliant with follow-up requirements.\n15. Patient is diagnosed and taking prescription medications to treat a muscular disorder that limits mobility due to severe stiffness and pain such as fibromyalgia or polymyalgia.",true,"ALL","21 Years",{"count":21,"type":22},30,"ESTIMATED","INTERVENTIONAL",[25],"NA","Multi-Centre Study in patients undergoing Total Hip Arthroplasty with the Smith+Nephew CATALYSTEM™ Primary Hip System. The primary objective is to establish the mean inferior stem migration (subsidence) of the CATALYSTEM™ stem using CT-RSA over the first two postoperative years.",[28],"Hip Osteoarthritis",[30,31,32],"Hip Replacement","CATALYSTEM","CT-RSA","NOT_YET_RECRUITING","2026-07-07",{"date":36,"type":37},"2026-07-13","ACTUAL",{"date":39,"type":22},"2026-08-01",{"date":41,"type":22},"2028-12-31",{"name":43,"class":44},"Canadian Radiostereometric Analysis Network","OTHER",1,{"id":47,"slug":48,"hasResults":12,"nctId":49,"briefTitle":50,"officialTitle":51,"acronym":4,"eligibilityCriteria":52,"healthyVolunteers":12,"sex":18,"minAge":53,"maxAge":54,"enrollmentInfo":55,"targetDuration":4,"studyType":23,"phases":57,"briefSummary":58,"conditions":59,"keywords":4,"overallStatus":61,"whyStopped":4,"lastUpdateSubmitDate":62,"lastUpdatePostDateStruct":63,"startDateStruct":65,"completionDateStruct":67,"leadSponsor":69,"locationsCount":45},"100639836","intravenous-dexamethasone-0-vs-4-vs-8-mg-as-an-adjunct-to-peng-block-for-postoperative-analgesia-in-total-hip-arthroplasty-a-randomized-double-blind-trial-100639836","NCT07581470","Intravenous Dexamethasone (0 vs 4 vs 8 mg) as an Adjunct to PENG Block for Postoperative Analgesia in Total Hip Arthroplasty: A Randomized Double-Blind Trial","A Prospective, Randomized, Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled Trial Evaluating Intravenous Dexamethasone (0 vs 4 vs 8 mg) as an Adjunct to PENG Block for Postoperative Analgesia in Total Hip Arthroplasty","Inclusion Criteria:\n\n* Age ≥ 18 years\n* Scheduled for elective total hip arthroplasty (THA)\n* Planned use of regional anesthesia including PENG block\n* American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) physical status I-III\n* Ability to understand the study procedures and provide written informed consent\n* Ability to assess pain using the Numeric Rating Scale (NRS)\n\nExclusion Criteria:\n\n* Known hypersensitivity to dexamethasone or any component of the study medication\n* Chronic corticosteroid therapy or use of systemic steroids within 14 days prior to surgery\n* Active systemic infection or sepsis\n* Significant immunosuppression (e.g., chemotherapy, biological therapy)\n* Pregnancy or breastfeeding\n* Severe cognitive impairment or inability to reliably assess pain\n* Uncontrolled diabetes mellitus (e.g., HbA1c \\> 8.5% or baseline blood glucose \\> 200 mg\u002FdL)","18 Years","100 Years",{"count":56,"type":22},198,[25],"his study will test whether giving dexamethasone through a vein can improve pain control after total hip replacement surgery. Dexamethasone is commonly used to reduce nausea and may also help with pain, but it is not clear which dose works best. Patients will be randomly assigned to receive either no dexamethasone, 4 mg, or 8 mg, in addition to standard anesthesia and a nerve block (PENG block). The main goal is to see how long patients go without needing additional pain medication after surgery. The study will also look at pain levels, use of opioid painkillers, nausea and vomiting, blood sugar levels, and possible side effects.",[60,28],"Osteoarthritis, Hip","RECRUITING","2026-06-29",{"date":64,"type":37},"2026-07-01",{"date":66,"type":37},"2026-05-08",{"date":68,"type":22},"2027-07-31",{"name":70,"class":44},"Poznan University of Medical Sciences",{"id":72,"slug":73,"hasResults":12,"nctId":74,"briefTitle":75,"officialTitle":76,"acronym":4,"eligibilityCriteria":77,"healthyVolunteers":12,"sex":18,"minAge":78,"maxAge":54,"enrollmentInfo":79,"targetDuration":4,"studyType":23,"phases":81,"briefSummary":82,"conditions":83,"keywords":4,"overallStatus":61,"whyStopped":4,"lastUpdateSubmitDate":62,"lastUpdatePostDateStruct":84,"startDateStruct":85,"completionDateStruct":87,"leadSponsor":89,"locationsCount":45},"100627497","sii-levels-following-peng-block-in-hip-arthroplasty-100627497","NCT07449403","SII Levels Following PENG Block in Hip Arthroplasty","Pericapsular Nerve Group Block Mitigates Surgical Stress and Enhances Analgesia in Total Hip Arthroplasty: A Randomized Controlled Trial","Inclusion Criteria:\n\n* Patients with ASA classification I-III\n* Aged 65-100 years\n* Who will be scheduled for hip arthroplasty under spinal anesthesia\n\nExclusion Criteria:\n\n* Patients who have a history of bleeding diathesis\n* Take anticoagulant therapy\n* History of chronic pain before surgery\n* Multiple trauma\n* patients unable to assess their pain (dementia)\n* patients operated under general anesthesia\n* patients having an infection in the region of the procedure\n* the patient who does not accept the procedure","65 Years",{"count":80,"type":22},60,[25],"This randomized controlled trial evaluates the effect of ultrasound-guided Pericapsular Nerve Group (PENG) block on the Systemic Immune-Inflammation Index (SII) in elderly patients undergoing total hip arthroplasty under spinal anesthesia. SII, calculated as platelet × neutrophil \u002F lymphocyte count, is used as a composite marker of perioperative inflammatory and immune response. The study investigates whether PENG block attenuates the systemic inflammatory reaction to surgical trauma compared to sham block.",[28],{"date":64,"type":37},{"date":86,"type":37},"2026-03-01",{"date":88,"type":22},"2026-09-30",{"name":70,"class":44},{"id":91,"slug":92,"hasResults":12,"nctId":93,"briefTitle":94,"officialTitle":95,"acronym":4,"eligibilityCriteria":96,"healthyVolunteers":12,"sex":18,"minAge":78,"maxAge":54,"enrollmentInfo":97,"targetDuration":4,"studyType":23,"phases":99,"briefSummary":100,"conditions":101,"keywords":4,"overallStatus":61,"whyStopped":4,"lastUpdateSubmitDate":62,"lastUpdatePostDateStruct":103,"startDateStruct":104,"completionDateStruct":105,"leadSponsor":107,"locationsCount":45},"100618151","peng-block-vs-peng-plus-periarticular-injection-vs-periarticular-injection-in-older-adults-100618151","NCT07327892","PENG Block vs PENG Plus Periarticular Injection vs Periarticular Injection in Older Adults","Comparison of Pericapsular Nerve Group (PENG) Block, PENG Block Plus Periarticular Injection, and Periarticular Injection Alone for Postoperative Pain Management in Older Adults Undergoing Hip Surgery: A Randomized Controlled Trial","Inclusion Criteria:\n\n* Age 65 years or older\n* Scheduled for elective or emergency hip surgery (e.g., hip fracture fixation or hip arthroplasty)\n* ASA physical status I-III\n* Ability to communicate pain intensity using the NRS scale\n* Written informed consent obtained from the patient or legal representative\n\nExclusion Criteria:\n\n* Patient refusal or inability to provide informed consent\n* Allergy, intolerance, or contraindication to any study medication: ropivacaine\n* Pre-existing neurological deficit or neuropathy of the affected limb\n* Coagulopathy (INR \\>1.5, platelets \\\u003C100,000\u002FµL) or current therapeutic anticoagulation that contraindicates regional anesthesia\n* Infection at or near the injection site\n* Severe hepatic or renal impairment\n* History of chronic opioid use (daily opioids \\>30 days before surgery)\n* Cognitive impairment or delirium precluding reliable pain assessment\n* BMI \\> 40 kg\u002Fm² (if you want to exclude for technical difficulty)\n* Patients receiving another regional nerve block for hip surgery\n* Pregnancy or breastfeeding\n* Participation in another interventional clinical trial within 30 days",{"count":98,"type":22},108,[25],"Pain after hip surgery is common in older adults and may limit early mobilization, increase the need for opioid medications, and contribute to complications such as delirium, nausea, or prolonged hospital stay. Effective postoperative pain management that preserves muscle strength and supports early rehabilitation is especially important in this population.\n\nSeveral analgesic strategies are currently used after hip surgery. Periarticular injection (PAI), administered by the surgeon during the procedure, is commonly used as part of standard care. The pericapsular nerve group (PENG) block is a newer ultrasound-guided regional anesthesia technique that targets the sensory nerves of the hip joint while sparing motor function. It may provide effective pain relief and facilitate early mobilization. However, it is unclear whether PENG block alone is superior to periarticular injection, and whether combining both techniques provides additional benefit.\n\nThe aim of this randomized controlled clinical study is to compare three postoperative analgesic strategies in older adults undergoing hip surgery: PENG block alone, PENG block combined with periarticular injection, and periarticular injection alone. Participants will be randomly assigned to one of three study groups.\n\nThe primary hypothesis is that regional anesthesia with a PENG block, either alone or combined with periarticular injection, will provide superior postoperative pain control compared with periarticular injection alone. A secondary hypothesis is that the combination of PENG block and periarticular injection will offer additional analgesic benefit compared with PENG block alone.\n\nOutcomes assessed in this study will include postoperative pain intensity, need for additional pain medications, time to first mobilization, and the occurrence of adverse events relevant to older adults, such as hypotension, excessive sedation, or postoperative delirium.\n\nThe results of this study may help determine the most effective and practical analgesic strategy for hip surgery in older adults and support evidence-based optimization of postoperative pain management.",[28,102],"Arthropathy of Hip",{"date":64,"type":37},{"date":66,"type":37},{"date":106,"type":22},"2027-02-28",{"name":70,"class":44},{"id":109,"slug":110,"hasResults":12,"nctId":111,"briefTitle":112,"officialTitle":113,"acronym":114,"eligibilityCriteria":115,"healthyVolunteers":12,"sex":18,"minAge":53,"maxAge":116,"enrollmentInfo":117,"targetDuration":4,"studyType":23,"phases":119,"briefSummary":120,"conditions":121,"keywords":126,"overallStatus":61,"whyStopped":4,"lastUpdateSubmitDate":136,"lastUpdatePostDateStruct":137,"startDateStruct":139,"completionDateStruct":141,"leadSponsor":143,"locationsCount":45},"100641421","preoperative-fasting-and-the-gut-microbiome-before-hip-replacement-100641421","NCT07651462","Preoperative Fasting and the Gut Microbiome Before Hip Replacement","Preoperative Metabolic Optimization: Influence of Intermittent and Buchinger-Type Fasting on the Gut Microbiome, Immune Profile, and Postoperative Complications in Patients Undergoing Primary Total Hip Arthroplasty - A Randomized Controlled Trial","PreFAST-Hip","Inclusion Criteria:\n\n* Adults aged 18-75 years (inclusive)\n* Scheduled for elective primary total hip arthroplasty (THA)\n* Able and willing to provide written informed consent\n* Able to follow the 20-day preoperative fasting protocol independently at home (if randomized to the fasting arm) or willing to be randomized to either arm\n\nExclusion Criteria:\n\n* Resorption disorder due to bowel disease (e.g. inflammatory bowel disease, short-bowel syndrome, active celiac disease)\n* Antibiotic therapy within the last 2 months before baseline (T0)\n* Probiotic, prebiotic, or symbiotic supplementation within the last 2 months before baseline (T0)\n* Inability or unwillingness to provide informed consent\n* Severe comorbidity precluding fasting (e.g. ASA ≥ IV, advanced renal\u002Fhepatic impairment, eating disorder)\n* BMI \\\u003C 18.5 kg\u002Fm² (underweight)\n* Concurrent participation in another interventional drug or device trial\n* Pregnancy or breastfeeding","75 Years",{"count":118,"type":22},130,[25],"Postoperative complications occur in 5-15% of patients undergoing elective primary total hip arthroplasty (THA), including periprosthetic joint infection (PJI), thrombosis, wound healing disorders, and metabolic dysregulation. The gut microbiome and the systemic immune profile have both been implicated as modifiable contributors to perioperative complication risk. Preoperative therapeutic fasting has been shown to remodel the gut microbiome, lower proinflammatory cytokines, and improve metabolic parameters.\n\nThis single-center, prospective, randomized, two-arm controlled trial at Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin investigates whether a structured 20-day preoperative fasting intervention (alternating cycles of the Buchinger Fastenbox and intermittent fasting) modulates two co-primary endpoints - plasma IL-8 (a central proinflammatory marker) and gut microbial alpha-diversity (Shannon index) - compared with standard preoperative care. Secondary endpoints include further immune markers (TNFα, IL-10, T-\u002FB-\u002FNK-cell subsets, activation\u002Fexhaustion markers, monocyte HLA-DR), microbiome composition and function, continuous glucose-monitoring and daily metabolic measures, patient-reported outcomes (HOOS, PROMIS-33, infection self-report), and clinical outcomes (postoperative complications per EBJIS criteria, length of stay).\n\nAdults aged 18-75 undergoing elective primary THA are stratified by metabolic status (metabolically healthy vs. metabolically unhealthy according to harmonized metabolic-syndrome criteria) and randomized 1:1 to the fasting intervention versus standard care. Stool and whole-blood samples are collected at baseline (Day -21), and at Day +7 post-operatively for shotgun-metagenomic sequencing and multiparameter flow cytometry, with additional cytokine blood samples at Day -1 and 6 h \u002F 24 h \u002F 72 h post-operatively. Continuous glucose monitoring is performed in all participants from Day -21 until surgery. Planned enrollment is 130 participants.",[28,122,123,124,125],"Arthroplasty, Replacement, Hip","Postoperative Complications","Surgical Wound Infection","Gastrointestinal Microbiome",[127,128,129,130,131,132,133,134,135],"Therapeutic fasting","Buchinger fasting","Intermittent fasting","Gut microbiome","Immunophenotyping","Continuous glucose monitoring","Total hip arthroplasty","Metabolic syndrome","Preoperative optimization","2026-06-17",{"date":138,"type":37},"2026-06-22",{"date":140,"type":37},"2025-07-01",{"date":142,"type":22},"2026-12-31",{"name":144,"class":44},"Charite University, Berlin, Germany",{"id":146,"slug":147,"hasResults":12,"nctId":148,"briefTitle":149,"officialTitle":150,"acronym":4,"eligibilityCriteria":151,"healthyVolunteers":12,"sex":18,"minAge":53,"maxAge":116,"enrollmentInfo":152,"targetDuration":4,"studyType":23,"phases":154,"briefSummary":156,"conditions":157,"keywords":158,"overallStatus":33,"whyStopped":4,"lastUpdateSubmitDate":161,"lastUpdatePostDateStruct":162,"startDateStruct":164,"completionDateStruct":166,"leadSponsor":168,"locationsCount":45},"100438503","phase-3-bone-marrow-aspirate-concentrate-versus-triamcinolone-injection-for-hip-osteoarthritis-100438503","NCT04990128","Bone Marrow Aspirate Concentrate Versus Triamcinolone Injection For Hip Osteoarthritis","Randomized Trial on the Evaluation of the Effectiveness of One Single Bone Marrow Aspirate Hip Injection Versus Triamcinolone for Hip Osteoarthritis","Inclusion:\n\n1. Provision of signed and dated consent form\n2. Stated willingness to comply with all study procedures and availability for the duration of the study\n3. Male or female, aged between 18 - 75 years old\n4. WOMAC Pain Subscale Total Score of 5 or higher in the Likert Scale (total score is 20)\n5. Kellgren-Lawrence Grade ≥ 2 on Hip X-Rays\n6. Body Mass Index ≤ 35 kg\u002Fm\\^2\n7. Unilateral or Bilateral Hip Osteoarthritis\n8. Prior physical therapy treatment for 6 weeks in the last 12 months and compliance with home exercise program\n9. Agreement to adhere to Lifestyle Considerations\n10. Discontinuation of pain\u002Fanti-inflammatory medications 2 week prior to baseline measurements\n11. Patients with cancer in remission for at least 5 years. Specific cancers which were treated with surgical resection and are not undergoing chemotherapy\u002Fradiation therapy such as breast cancer, colon cancer, or skin cancer, and others could participate when deemed in remission for 1 year. Written approval from oncologist will be necessary prior to enrollment\n12. Negative gram stain result\n\nExclusion:\n\n1. Prior corticosteroid injection to the hip\n2. History of hip replacement(s)\n3. Noncompliance to preventive screening tests for cancer indicated by age\n4. Active autoimmune disease\n5. Current use of oral corticosteroid\n6. Use of immunosuppressive medications, or who are known to me immunocompromised\n7. Inability to be weaned of oral anti-inflammatory medications\n8. History of Diabetes or HbA1c ≥ 6.5%\n9. Uncontrolled Thyroid Dysfunction: 0.450 uIU\u002FmL ≥ TSH levels ≥ 4.500 uIU\u002FmL\n10. Vitamin D Level \\\u003C 30 ng\u002Fml\n11. Anemia (Hgb \\\u003C 11.7 g\u002FdL for Women; Hgb \\\u003C 13 g\u002FdL for men)\n12. eGFR \\\u003C 60 mL\u002Fmin\u002F1.73 m\\^2\n13. Thrombocytopenia with platelet count less than 150,000 x 10\\^9 L\n14. Patients with coagulopathies based on known clotting disorder\n15. Patients currently on anti-coagulation therapies\n16. Patients who report any active infection(s) including cellulitis, TB, HIV, COVID, Hepatitis B and C\n17. Moving over the next year\n18. Inability to consent to the research study\n19. Inability to complete forms electronically\n20. Subjects in any other clinical trials\n21. History of allergic reaction to lidocaine\n22. Pregnancy or planning to be pregnant during trial\n23. Breastfeeding",{"count":153,"type":22},100,[155],"PHASE3","This is a single site, randomized single blinded, two arm study researching the effects of bone marrow aspirate concentrate (BMAC) versus Triamcinolone in patients with hip osteoarthritis. The aims and hypothesis are as follows:\n\nSpecific Aim 1: Evaluate the change in pain and functional scores of a single bone marrow aspirate injection in comparison to triamcinolone in patients with hip osteoarthritis through validated patient reported outcomes scores at baseline to 12 months (6 weeks, 3 months, 6 months, and 12 months).\n\nHypothesis: The investigators hypothesize that triamcinolone and BMAC groups will have pain reduction after each respective intervention. The changes with triamcinolone will be noticeable on the short term. The BMAC changes will take longer to have an effect but will longer duration. The investigators hypothesize that at 6 months and 1 year participants receiving BMAC will have better scores reported on the WOMAC compared to the triamcinolone injection and better than prior to injection.\n\nSpecific Aim 2: Evaluate the change of bone marrow aspirate injection in comparison to triamcinolone in participant's performance on the 6 minute walk test from baseline to 12 months (6 weeks, 3 months, 6 months, and 12 months).\n\nHypothesis: The investigators hypothesize that there will be higher walking distances on the 6 minute walk test in the participants receiving a BMAC injection in comparison to triamcinolone starting at the 3 months follow-up time.\n\nSpecific Aim 3: Quantify and correlate cell characterization with patient reported outcomes score.\n\nHypothesis: The investigators hypothesize that there will be better patient reported outcomes in patients who have a higher concentration of mesenchymal stem cells injected.\n\nThe investigators will enroll 50 patients into each arm. Bone marrow will be aspirated then subsequently concentrated using the Emcyte PureBMC kit. The investigators will test the BMAC viability, rapid sterility, platelet concentration, volume, and total nucleated cell counts prior to injecting. The BMAC will be utilized as a hip injection into the affected hip of the patient.\n\nPatients receiving the Triamcinolone will undergo a sham bone needling to simulate the aspiration to keep patients blinded. Both groups will receive their injections under ultrasound guidance.",[28],[159,160],"bone marrow aspirate concentrate","triamcinolone","2026-06-09",{"date":163,"type":37},"2026-06-11",{"date":165,"type":22},"2026-06-23",{"date":167,"type":22},"2027-11",{"name":169,"class":44},"The Cleveland Clinic",{"id":171,"slug":172,"hasResults":12,"nctId":173,"briefTitle":174,"officialTitle":174,"acronym":4,"eligibilityCriteria":175,"healthyVolunteers":12,"sex":18,"minAge":53,"maxAge":4,"enrollmentInfo":176,"targetDuration":4,"studyType":178,"phases":4,"briefSummary":179,"conditions":180,"keywords":4,"overallStatus":33,"whyStopped":4,"lastUpdateSubmitDate":194,"lastUpdatePostDateStruct":195,"startDateStruct":197,"completionDateStruct":199,"leadSponsor":201,"locationsCount":4},"100643683","prospective-case-series-evaluating-6-month-and-12-month-outcomes-after-cryoneurolysis-for-chronic-pain-100643683","NCT07639060","Prospective Case Series Evaluating 6-Month and 12-Month Outcomes After Cryoneurolysis for Chronic Pain","Inclusion Criteria:\n\n* Diagnosis of chronic pain (generally pain duration of at least 3-6 months) localized to an anatomical region appropriate for cryoneurolysis as determined by the treating physician.\n* Planned cryoneurolysis procedure as part of standard clinical care.\n* Ability to provide written informed consent.\n* Ability and willingness to complete baseline and follow-up questionnaires.\n\nExclusion Criteria:\n\n* Cryoneurolysis performed as part of a separate investigational trial in which data sharing is not permitted.\n* Active infection or other clinical contraindication to the procedure as determined by the treating clinician.\n* Life expectancy of less than 12 months in the judgment of the treating clinician.\n* Any condition that, in the investigator's opinion, would interfere with study participation or completion of follow-up, such as severe psychiatric instability or active substance use that precludes reliable follow-up",{"count":177,"type":22},80,"OBSERVATIONAL","To prospectively describe patient-centered and health utilization outcomes through 12 months after cryoneurolysis performed as routine clinical care for chronic pain at Yale.",[181,182,183,184,28,185,186,187,188,189,190,191,192,193],"Chronic Pain","PERIPHERAL NEUROPATHY","Occipital Neuralgia","Chronic Hip Pain","Knee Osteoarthritis","Spasticity","Chronic Low Back Pain","Lumbar Spondylosis","Cervical Spondylosis","Shoulder Arthritis","Causalgia","Chronic Pain Syndrome","Chronic Neck Pain","2026-06-05",{"date":196,"type":37},"2026-06-10",{"date":198,"type":22},"2026-06",{"date":200,"type":22},"2028-07",{"name":202,"class":44},"Yale University",{"id":204,"slug":205,"hasResults":12,"nctId":206,"briefTitle":207,"officialTitle":208,"acronym":209,"eligibilityCriteria":210,"healthyVolunteers":12,"sex":18,"minAge":53,"maxAge":211,"enrollmentInfo":212,"targetDuration":4,"studyType":23,"phases":214,"briefSummary":216,"conditions":217,"keywords":4,"overallStatus":33,"whyStopped":4,"lastUpdateSubmitDate":220,"lastUpdatePostDateStruct":221,"startDateStruct":222,"completionDateStruct":223,"leadSponsor":225,"locationsCount":4},"100640621","phase-4-post-operative-spinal-block-duration-and-pain-relief-after-hip-replacement-surgery-comparing-single-shot-spinal-ropivacaine-and-bupivacaine-100640621","NCT07631091","Post-Operative Spinal Block Duration and Pain Relief After Hip Replacement Surgery: Comparing Single-Shot Spinal Ropivacaine and Bupivacaine","Post-Operative Analgesia and Spinal Block Duration Following Total Hip Arthroplasties: Comparison of Single-Shot Intrathecal Ropivacaine and Bupivacaine in a Randomized Double-Blinded Controlled Study","ROBUTHA","Inclusion Criteria:\n\n* 18 - 80 years of age\n* Scheduled for a primary elective total hip arthroplasty\n* Patient must be a candidate for same day discharge\n* Informed consent understood and signed\n* Patient is 160 - 186 cm tall\n\nExclusion Criteria:\n\n* Scheduled bilateral THA\n* Contraindication to or failed spinal anesthesia\n* Allergy or contraindication to NSAIDs (e.g. chronic kidney disease)\n* Diabetes requiring insulin medication\n* Preoperative chronic use of illegal substances\n* Renal insufficiency (eGFR \\\u003C 60)\n* Unstable psychiatric conditions\n* Severe neurological disorder\n* Cognitive deficiencies preventing informed consent\n* Language barrier preventing completion of study\n* Pregnancy or breastfeeding\n* Chronic pain syndrome","80 Years",{"count":213,"type":22},176,[215],"PHASE4","This study aims to determine whether isobaric ropivacaine is more suitable than isobaric bupivacaine for spinal anesthesia in outpatient total hip arthroplasty (THA). The study will evaluate whether ropivacaine allows faster recovery of sensory and motor function while still providing adequate surgical anesthesia and postoperative pain control. Additional aims are to assess the effects of the anesthetic technique on same-day discharge rates, postoperative recovery, urinary retention, opioid consumption, and patient satisfaction after outpatient THA.",[28,218,219],"Hip Arthroplasty Replacement","Postoperative Pain After Ambulatory Surgery","2026-06-02",{"date":194,"type":37},{"date":198,"type":22},{"date":224,"type":22},"2028-05",{"name":226,"class":44},"University of Turku",{"id":228,"slug":229,"hasResults":12,"nctId":230,"briefTitle":231,"officialTitle":232,"acronym":233,"eligibilityCriteria":234,"healthyVolunteers":12,"sex":18,"minAge":53,"maxAge":4,"enrollmentInfo":235,"targetDuration":4,"studyType":23,"phases":237,"briefSummary":238,"conditions":239,"keywords":4,"overallStatus":61,"whyStopped":4,"lastUpdateSubmitDate":242,"lastUpdatePostDateStruct":243,"startDateStruct":245,"completionDateStruct":247,"leadSponsor":249,"locationsCount":251},"100481049","evaluating-xperience-advanced-surgical-irrigation-100481049","NCT05543941","Evaluating XPERIENCE™ Advanced Surgical Irrigation","Evaluating XPERIENCE™ Advanced Surgical Irrigation on Risk of Periprosthetic Joint Infection: A Multicenter Randomized Controlled Trial","XPERIENCE","Inclusion Criteria:\n\n1. Male and female patients aged 18 years or older\n2. Diagnosis of osteoarthritis, inflammatory arthritis, osteonecrosis, or post-traumatic arthritis to the affected joint.\n3. Primary TKA, THA, and HR\n4. Subjects receiving both cemented or uncemented orthopaedic implants\n5. Willing and able to sign written consent, follow study protocol and attend follow-up\n\nExclusion Criteria:\n\n1. Inability or refusal to sign informed consent form\n2. Non-English or French speaking, and no licensed translator, family member or substitute decision maker available.\n3. Prior arthroplasty procedure to the affected joint\n4. Procedures involving solid HA implants\n5. Oncologic diagnosis to the affected joint.\n6. Non-TKA, THA or HR prosthesis (i.e., hemiarthroplasty, unicompartmental arthroplasty etc.)\n7. Allergy to any of the components of XP Advanced Surgical Irrigation\n8. Allergy to iodine\n9. Presence of concurrent active infection, primary immunodeficiency, history of uncontrolled HIV (CD4 count \\\u003C200 cells\u002FuL), treatment with immunomodulatory medications for malignancy or autoimmune disease (with exception to inflammatory arthritis), chronic glucocorticosteroid use (≥20 mg of prednisone daily for at least 1 month with another cause of immunosuppression), and solid organ and\u002For bone marrow transplantation.\n10. History of septic arthritis to the affected joint within two years of surgery(1).\n11. History of steroid injection to the affected joint within the three months preceding surgery.\n12. Simultaneous bilateral total joint arthroplasty",{"count":236,"type":22},7600,[25],"A prospective, multi-center, double-arm, parallel, interventional, randomized, controlled clinical trial to assess the rate of periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) in patients undergoing primary total knee arthroplasty (TKA), total hip arthroplasty (THA) or hip resurfacing (HR) with XPERIENCE™ (XP) Advanced Surgical Irrigation versus dilute Betadine (DB).",[28,240,185,241],"Hip Arthritis","Knee Arthritis","2026-05-25",{"date":244,"type":37},"2026-05-28",{"date":246,"type":37},"2023-04-01",{"date":248,"type":22},"2027-12-31",{"name":250,"class":44},"Ottawa Hospital Research Institute",8,{"id":253,"slug":254,"hasResults":12,"nctId":255,"briefTitle":256,"officialTitle":257,"acronym":4,"eligibilityCriteria":258,"healthyVolunteers":12,"sex":18,"minAge":116,"maxAge":54,"enrollmentInfo":259,"targetDuration":4,"studyType":23,"phases":261,"briefSummary":262,"conditions":263,"keywords":4,"overallStatus":61,"whyStopped":4,"lastUpdateSubmitDate":264,"lastUpdatePostDateStruct":265,"startDateStruct":267,"completionDateStruct":268,"leadSponsor":270,"locationsCount":45},"100627502","peng-block-and-delirium-after-hip-arthroplasty-100627502","NCT07449468","PENG Block and Delirium After Hip Arthroplasty","Effect of Pericapsular Nerve Group (PENG) Block Added to Spinal Anesthesia on Postoperative Delirium in Older Adults Undergoing Primary Total Hip Arthroplasty: A Prospective, Randomized, Assessor-Blinded Controlled Trial","Inclusion Criteria:\n\n* Age ≥ 75 years\n* Scheduled for elective primary total hip arthroplasty\n* Planned spinal anesthesia\n* ASA physical status II-III\n* Ability to provide written informed consent\n* Ability to communicate and reliably assess pain using the Numeric Rating Scale (NRS)\n* Expected postoperative hospitalization ≥ 72 hours\n\nExclusion Criteria:\n\n* Pre-existing delirium, acute psychosis, or active major psychiatric disorder\n* Documented severe dementia or inability to provide informed consent\n* Severe hearing or visual impairment preventing reliable CAM assessment\n* Contraindications to regional anesthesia (e.g., coagulopathy according to institutional standards, infection at the injection site, allergy to local anesthetics)\n* Pre-existing neurological deficits of the operative lower limb are interfering with assessment\n* Chronic opioid use (\\>30 mg morphine milligram equivalents per day for \\>2 weeks prior to surgery)\n* Severe renal impairment (eGFR \\\u003C30 mL\u002Fmin\u002F1.73 m²)\n* Severe hepatic insufficiency\n* Participation in another interventional clinical trial within 30 days\n* Any other condition that, in the investigator's judgment, may interfere with study participation or protocol adherence",{"count":260,"type":22},180,[25],"Postoperative delirium is a common and serious complication in older adults undergoing total hip arthroplasty, associated with prolonged hospitalization, increased morbidity, delayed rehabilitation, and long-term cognitive decline. Modifiable perioperative risk factors include uncontrolled postoperative pain, opioid consumption, impaired early mobilization, and systemic inflammatory response.\n\nThe Pericapsular Nerve Group (PENG) block is a regional anesthesia technique targeting the sensory innervation of the anterior hip capsule and may provide effective analgesia while preserving motor function. Improved pain control and opioid reduction may decrease the incidence of postoperative delirium.\n\nThis prospective, randomized, parallel-group controlled trial aims to evaluate whether the addition of ultrasound-guided PENG block to spinal anesthesia reduces the incidence of postoperative delirium within 72 hours after primary total hip arthroplasty in patients aged 65 years or older. Delirium will be assessed using the Confusion Assessment Method (CAM) by blinded outcome assessors.\n\nSecondary outcomes include postoperative opioid consumption, pain intensity (NRS), time to first rescue opioid, postoperative nausea and vomiting, time to mobilization, block-related adverse events, and perioperative inflammatory indices (neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio, platelet-to-lymphocyte ratio, and monocyte-to-lymphocyte ratio).\n\nThe study will enroll 144 patients randomized 1:1 to spinal anesthesia alone or spinal anesthesia plus PENG block.",[28],"2026-05-20",{"date":266,"type":37},"2026-05-22",{"date":86,"type":37},{"date":269,"type":22},"2027-06-30",{"name":70,"class":44},{"id":272,"slug":273,"hasResults":12,"nctId":274,"briefTitle":275,"officialTitle":276,"acronym":4,"eligibilityCriteria":277,"healthyVolunteers":12,"sex":18,"minAge":78,"maxAge":54,"enrollmentInfo":278,"targetDuration":4,"studyType":23,"phases":280,"briefSummary":281,"conditions":282,"keywords":4,"overallStatus":61,"whyStopped":4,"lastUpdateSubmitDate":264,"lastUpdatePostDateStruct":283,"startDateStruct":284,"completionDateStruct":286,"leadSponsor":288,"locationsCount":45},"100618390","three-variants-of-the-peng-block-with-and-without-perineural-adjuvants-in-older-adults-100618390","NCT07330999","Three Variants of the PENG Block With and Without Perineural Adjuvants in Older Adults","Comparison of Standard PENG Block Versus PENG With Perineural Dexamethasone or Perineural Dexmedetomidine in Patients Aged 65 Years and Older Undergoing Hip Surgery: A Randomized Controlled Trial","Inclusion Criteria:\n\n* Age 65 years or older\n* Scheduled for elective or emergency hip surgery (e.g., hip fracture fixation or hip arthroplasty)\n* ASA physical status I-III\n* Planned use of a PENG block as part of perioperative analgesia\n* Ability to communicate pain intensity using the NRS scale\n* Written informed consent obtained from the patient or legal representative\n\nExclusion Criteria:\n\n* Refusal or inability to provide informed consent\n* Known allergy, intolerance, or contraindication to any of the study medications: ropivacaine, dexamethasone, dexmedetomidine\n* Pre-existing neurological deficit or neuropathy in the affected limb\n* Coagulopathy or laboratory abnormality that contraindicates regional anesthesia: INR \\>1.5, or platelet count \\\u003C100,000\u002FµL, or therapeutic anticoagulation that cannot be safely paused\n* Infection at or near the needle insertion site\n* Severe hepatic or renal impairment\n* Chronic opioid therapy (\\>30 days of daily opioids before surgery)\n* Cognitive impairment or delirium that prevents reliable pain assessment\n* BMI \\>40 kg\u002Fm² (due to potential technical difficulty and reduced accuracy of ultrasound guidance)\n* Previous regional block affecting the target area for the current surgery\n* Pregnancy or breastfeeding\n* Participation in another interventional clinical trial within 30 days",{"count":279,"type":22},120,[25],"This study will compare three versions of the Pericapsular Nerve Group (PENG) block in adults aged 65 years and older who are undergoing hip surgery. The PENG block is a regional anesthesia technique used to reduce pain around the hip joint and may improve early recovery after surgery.\n\nAll patients in the study will receive the PENG block using 20 mL of 0.2% ropivacaine. They will then be randomly assigned to one of three groups:\n\nGroup 1: PENG block using ropivacaine only (no additional medications). Group 2: PENG block using ropivacaine with 4 mg of dexamethasone injected near the nerves.\n\nGroup 3: PENG block using ropivacaine with 25 micrograms of dexmedetomidine injected near the nerves.\n\nDexamethasone and dexmedetomidine are medications that may increase the duration and quality of regional anesthesia. It is not known whether adding one of these medications provides longer-lasting or better pain relief compared to using ropivacaine alone.\n\nThe main purpose of this study is to determine whether the addition of dexamethasone or dexmedetomidine improves the effectiveness of the PENG block in relieving pain after hip surgery. The study will evaluate pain levels, opioid consumption, time to first rescue pain medication, need for additional analgesia, and recovery outcomes. Safety, side effects, and any block-related complications will also be monitored.\n\nThe investigators hypothesize that adding either perineural dexamethasone or dexmedetomidine will result in longer and more effective pain relief compared with the standard PENG block without an adjuvant.\n\nThis research may help identify the most effective form of the PENG block for older adults undergoing hip surgery and contribute to improved pain management, reduced opioid use, and better postoperative recovery.",[28],{"date":266,"type":37},{"date":285,"type":37},"2026-02-13",{"date":287,"type":22},"2027-01-31",{"name":70,"class":44},{"id":290,"slug":291,"hasResults":12,"nctId":292,"briefTitle":293,"officialTitle":294,"acronym":4,"eligibilityCriteria":295,"healthyVolunteers":12,"sex":18,"minAge":78,"maxAge":54,"enrollmentInfo":296,"targetDuration":4,"studyType":23,"phases":297,"briefSummary":298,"conditions":299,"keywords":4,"overallStatus":61,"whyStopped":4,"lastUpdateSubmitDate":264,"lastUpdatePostDateStruct":301,"startDateStruct":302,"completionDateStruct":303,"leadSponsor":304,"locationsCount":45},"100618154","peng-block-variants-with-dexamethasone-and-dexmedetomidine-in-older-adults-100618154","NCT07327931","PENG Block Variants With Dexamethasone and Dexmedetomidine in Older Adults","Comparison of Three Variants of PENG Block Using 20 mL of 0.2% Ropivacaine With Different Combinations of Dexamethasone and Perineural Dexmedetomidine in Patients Aged 65 Years and Older Undergoing Hip Surgery: A Randomized Controlled Trial.","Inclusion Criteria:\n\n* Age 65 years or older\n* Scheduled for elective or emergency hip surgery (e.g., hip fracture fixation or hip arthroplasty)\n* ASA physical status I-III\n* Ability to communicate pain intensity using the NRS scale\n* Written informed consent obtained from the patient or legal representative\n* Planned use of PENG block as part of multimodal perioperative analgesia\n\nExclusion Criteria:\n\n* Patient refusal or inability to provide informed consent\n* Allergy, intolerance, or contraindication to any study medication: ropivacaine, dexamethasone, dexmedetomidine\n* Pre-existing neurological deficit or neuropathy of the affected limb\n* Coagulopathy (INR \\>1.5, platelets \\\u003C100,000\u002FµL) or current therapeutic anticoagulation that contraindicates regional anesthesia\n* Infection at or near the injection site\n* Severe hepatic or renal impairment\n* History of chronic opioid use (daily opioids \\>30 days before surgery)\n* Cognitive impairment or delirium precluding reliable pain assessment\n* BMI \\> 40 kg\u002Fm² (if you want to exclude for technical difficulty)\n* Patients receiving another regional nerve block for hip surgery\n* Pregnancy or breastfeeding\n* Participation in another interventional clinical trial within 30 days",{"count":279,"type":22},[25],"This study will compare three different versions of the Pericapsular Nerve Group (PENG) block in adults aged 65 years and older who are undergoing surgery for hip conditions. The PENG block is a regional anesthesia technique that can reduce pain after surgery and decrease the need for strong opioid pain medications.\n\nAll patients in the study will receive the PENG block with 20 mL of 0.2% ropivacaine, but they will be divided into three groups based on the additional medications used:\n\nGroup 1: PENG block with ropivacaine plus 4 mg of dexamethasone given intravenously.\n\nGroup 2: PENG block with ropivacaine plus 25 micrograms of dexmedetomidine given near the nerves and 4 mg of dexamethasone given intravenously.\n\nGroup 3: PENG block with ropivacaine plus 25 micrograms of dexmedetomidine and 4 mg of dexamethasone given near the nerves.\n\nBoth dexmedetomidine and dexamethasone are medications that may improve the strength and duration of nerve blocks.\n\nThe main goal of this study is to determine which combination provides the best pain control after hip surgery, reduces the need for opioid medications, and improves patient comfort and recovery. We also aim to evaluate the safety and side-effects of each technique.\n\nWe hypothesize that adding both dexmedetomidine and dexamethasone near the nerves will provide the longest and most effective pain relief when compared to intravenous administration alone.\n\nThis trial may help identify the most effective PENG block formula for older adults undergoing hip surgery and could improve pain management, decrease complications related to opioids, and support faster recovery.",[28,300],"Hip Pain Chronic",{"date":266,"type":37},{"date":285,"type":37},{"date":287,"type":22},{"name":70,"class":44},{"id":306,"slug":307,"hasResults":12,"nctId":308,"briefTitle":309,"officialTitle":310,"acronym":311,"eligibilityCriteria":312,"healthyVolunteers":12,"sex":18,"minAge":313,"maxAge":54,"enrollmentInfo":314,"targetDuration":4,"studyType":23,"phases":316,"briefSummary":317,"conditions":318,"keywords":319,"overallStatus":33,"whyStopped":4,"lastUpdateSubmitDate":321,"lastUpdatePostDateStruct":322,"startDateStruct":324,"completionDateStruct":326,"leadSponsor":328,"locationsCount":45},"100637092","comparison-of-spinal-anesthesia-with-intrathecal-morphine-versus-peng-block-with-or-without-dexamethasone-in-hip-arthroplasty-100637092","NCT07584200","Comparison of Spinal Anesthesia With Intrathecal Morphine Versus PENG Block With or Without Dexamethasone in Hip Arthroplasty","Comparison of the Efficacy and Safety of Three Regional Anesthesia Strategies in Patients Undergoing Elective Total Hip Arthroplasty: A Prospective, Randomized, Multicenter Clinical Trial","THA","Inclusion Criteria:\n\n* Adults aged 60 to 100 years\n* Scheduled for elective total hip arthroplasty\n* American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) physical status I-III\n* Ability to understand the study procedures and provide written informed consent\n\nExclusion Criteria:\n\n* Known allergy or hypersensitivity to ropivacaine, morphine, or dexamethasone\n* Coagulation disorders or ongoing anticoagulant therapy contraindicating spinal anesthesia or regional nerve blocks\n* Infection at the site of spinal or peripheral nerve block injection\n* Pre-existing neurological disorders affecting sensory or motor function\n* Severe hepatic or renal insufficiency\n* Chronic opioid use for more than 3 months prior to surgery\n* Refusal or inability to provide informed consent","60 Years",{"count":315,"type":22},90,[25],"The goal of this clinical trial is to learn which of three regional anesthesia approaches provides better pain relief and safety for older adults having planned hip replacement surgery. Researchers will study people aged 60 years and older who are scheduled for elective total hip arthroplasty.\n\nThe main questions this study aims to answer are:\n\nWhich anesthesia method provides better pain control after surgery? Which method reduces the need for opioid pain medicines? Are there differences in side effects and recovery between the approaches? Participants will be randomly assigned to one of three groups. All participants will receive spinal anesthesia. One group will receive spinal anesthesia with intrathecal morphine. The other two groups will receive spinal anesthesia combined with a nerve block called the pericapsular nerve group (PENG) block, with or without the addition of dexamethasone.\n\nParticipants will have their pain levels measured at regular times during the first two days after surgery. Researchers will also record opioid use, time to first pain medication, ability to move after surgery, length of hospital stay, and any side effects such as nausea or itching. Blood tests will be used to measure markers of inflammation.\n\nThe results of this study may help doctors choose safer and more effective pain control strategies for people undergoing hip replacement surgery.",[102,28],[320],"total hip arthroplasty","2026-05-06",{"date":323,"type":37},"2026-05-13",{"date":325,"type":22},"2026-06-01",{"date":327,"type":22},"2027-05-01",{"name":70,"class":44},{"id":330,"slug":331,"hasResults":12,"nctId":332,"briefTitle":333,"officialTitle":334,"acronym":4,"eligibilityCriteria":335,"healthyVolunteers":12,"sex":18,"minAge":78,"maxAge":54,"enrollmentInfo":336,"targetDuration":4,"studyType":23,"phases":337,"briefSummary":338,"conditions":339,"keywords":4,"overallStatus":61,"whyStopped":4,"lastUpdateSubmitDate":321,"lastUpdatePostDateStruct":341,"startDateStruct":343,"completionDateStruct":345,"leadSponsor":347,"locationsCount":45},"100606855","phase-4-peng-vs-l-espb-with-s-espb-for-analgesia-in-total-hip-arthroplasty-100606855","NCT07180979","PENG vs L-ESPB With S-ESPB for Analgesia in Total Hip Arthroplasty","Comparison of Pericapsular Nerve Group (PENG) Block Versus Lumbar Erector Spinae Plane Block (L-ESPB) Combined With Sacral ESPB (S-ESPB) for Analgesia in Total Hip Arthroplasty (THA): A Randomized Clinical Trial","Inclusion Criteria:\n\n* Age ≥ 65 years\n* ASA physical status I-III\n* Elective unilateral THA via posterior or lateral approach\n* Informed consent provided\n\nExclusion Criteria:\n\n* Allergy to study drugs (ropivacaine, dexamethasone)\n* Chronic opioid use (\\>30 MME\u002Fday)\n* Coagulopathy or infection at the injection site\n* BMI \\> 40 kg\u002Fm²\n* Pre-existing motor weakness or neuropathy in the affected limb\n* Cognitive impairment precluding informed consent",{"count":315,"type":22},[215],"The goal of this clinical trial is to evaluate whether different types of regional anesthesia can improve pain control and functional recovery after total hip arthroplasty in adult patients undergoing elective hip replacement surgery.\n\nThe main questions it aims to answer are:\n\nDoes the PENG block reduce opioid use in the first 48 hours after surgery more effectively than the combined L-ESPB + S-ESPB technique? Which method provides better pain relief, preserves muscle strength, and supports earlier mobilization? Researchers will compare the Pericapsular Nerve Group (PENG) block with the combination of Lumbar and Sacral Erector Spinae Plane Blocks (L-ESPB + S-ESPB) to see which provides better pain control, fewer side effects, and faster recovery.\n\nParticipants will:\n\nBe randomly assigned to receive one of the two types of ultrasound-guided regional anesthesia Undergo standard hip replacement surgery under spinal anesthesia Be monitored for pain scores, opioid use, time to first walking, muscle strength, satisfaction, and side effects over the first 48 hours after surgery.",[28,340,300],"Hip Arthropathy",{"date":342,"type":37},"2026-05-07",{"date":344,"type":37},"2025-09-15",{"date":346,"type":22},"2026-11-30",{"name":70,"class":44},{"id":349,"slug":350,"hasResults":12,"nctId":351,"briefTitle":352,"officialTitle":353,"acronym":4,"eligibilityCriteria":354,"healthyVolunteers":12,"sex":18,"minAge":53,"maxAge":4,"enrollmentInfo":355,"targetDuration":4,"studyType":23,"phases":356,"briefSummary":357,"conditions":358,"keywords":361,"overallStatus":33,"whyStopped":4,"lastUpdateSubmitDate":368,"lastUpdatePostDateStruct":369,"startDateStruct":371,"completionDateStruct":372,"leadSponsor":374,"locationsCount":45},"100633772","posterior-pericapsular-deep-gluteal-block-combined-with-pericapsular-nerve-group-and-lateral-femoral-cutaneous-nerve-blocks-for-hip-surgery-analgesia-100633772","NCT07531030","Posterior Pericapsular Deep Gluteal Block Combined With Pericapsular Nerve Group and Lateral Femoral Cutaneous Nerve Blocks for Hip Surgery Analgesia","Efficacy of Combining Ultrasound-guided Posterior Pericapsular Deep Gluteal Block to Both Pericapsular Nerve Group and Lateral Femoral Cutaneous Nerve Blocks for Postoperative Analgesia in Orthopedic Hip Surgeries","Inclusion Criteria:\n\n* Age greater than or equal to 18 years.\n* Both genders included.\n* American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) physical status classification I-III.\n* Undergoing elective orthopedic hip surgery.\n* Provision of written informed consent.\n\nExclusion Criteria:\n\n* Patient refusal of procedure or participation.\n* American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) physical status classification IV.\n* Allergy to any of the drugs used in the study.\n* Local skin infection at the injection site.\n* Coagulation disorder.\n* History of cardiac arrhythmia, seizures, or increased intracranial tension.\n* Alcohol or drug abuse, or psychiatric disease.\n* History of chronic pain.",{"count":5,"type":22},[25],"This study aims to investigate the efficacy of adding a Posterior Pericapsular Deep gluteal block to two other standard nerve blocks-the Pericapsular Nerve Group block and the Lateral Femoral Cutaneous Nerve block-for patients undergoing orthopedic hip surgery. While standard blocks target the front of the hip, many patients still feel pain in the back (posterior) of the joint. Researchers will compare two groups of patients to see if this triple-block combination provides better pain relief and reduces the need for rescue opioid medications in the 24 hours following surgery.",[359,28,360],"Postoperative Pain","Hip Fractures",[362,363,364,365,366,367],"Posterior Pericapsular Deep Gluteal Block","Pericapsular Nerve Group Block","Lateral Femoral Cutaneous Nerve Block","Ultrasound-Guided Regional Anesthesia","Multimodal Analgesia","Orthopedic Hip Surgery","2026-04-18",{"date":370,"type":37},"2026-04-22",{"date":325,"type":22},{"date":373,"type":22},"2027-12-01",{"name":375,"class":44},"Ain Shams University",{"id":377,"slug":378,"hasResults":12,"nctId":379,"briefTitle":380,"officialTitle":380,"acronym":4,"eligibilityCriteria":381,"healthyVolunteers":12,"sex":18,"minAge":382,"maxAge":383,"enrollmentInfo":384,"targetDuration":4,"studyType":23,"phases":386,"briefSummary":387,"conditions":388,"keywords":391,"overallStatus":33,"whyStopped":4,"lastUpdateSubmitDate":397,"lastUpdatePostDateStruct":398,"startDateStruct":400,"completionDateStruct":402,"leadSponsor":404,"locationsCount":45},"100365525","psychosocial-interventions-for-young-adults-with-hip-pain-100365525","NCT04039386","Psychosocial Interventions for Young Adults With Hip Pain","Inclusion Criteria:\n\n* We will enroll young adults (15-39) presenting to one of several physical therapy and orthopedic practices in the state of Iowa for treatment of nonarthritic hip pain.\n* Chief complaint of hip pain or dysfunction, and a diagnosis of a nonarthritic hip condition including labral tear, femoroacetabular impingement (FAI), snapping hip, femoral anteversion or dysplasia.\n\nExclusion Criteria:\n\n* Exclusion criteria will include age \\\u003C15 or \\>40 years\n* Difficulty with written English\n* Treatment for alternative conditions such as trochanteric bursitis, hip dislocation, avascular necrosis or fracture.","15 Years","39 Years",{"count":385,"type":22},150,[25],"Psychosocial conditions are common in young adults with hip pain including depression, anxiety, pain catastrophizing, and narcotic use. The incidence of these conditions is not well defined. Interventions to optimize psychosocial conditions with non-surgical or surgical treatments has not been investigated. The goal of this project is to determine the incidence of psychosocial conditions in the young adult population with hip pain and determine if cognitive based therapy can improve clinical outcomes in these individuals.",[389,300,28,240,390],"Hip Dysplasia","Psychosocial Problem",[392,393,394,395,396],"Hip Pain","Hip Instability","Hip Impingement","Cognitive Based Therapy","Psychosocial Conditions","2026-04-14",{"date":399,"type":37},"2026-04-15",{"date":401,"type":22},"2026-09-01",{"date":403,"type":22},"2028-08-01",{"name":405,"class":44},"Michael C Willey",{"id":407,"slug":408,"hasResults":12,"nctId":409,"briefTitle":410,"officialTitle":411,"acronym":412,"eligibilityCriteria":413,"healthyVolunteers":17,"sex":18,"minAge":53,"maxAge":4,"enrollmentInfo":414,"targetDuration":4,"studyType":23,"phases":416,"briefSummary":417,"conditions":418,"keywords":421,"overallStatus":61,"whyStopped":4,"lastUpdateSubmitDate":428,"lastUpdatePostDateStruct":429,"startDateStruct":431,"completionDateStruct":433,"leadSponsor":435,"locationsCount":45},"100609293","development-of-an-outcome-score-for-patients-with-knee-osteoarthritis-and-knee-joint-endoprosthesis-using-an-app-100609293","NCT07212699","Development of an Outcome Score for Patients With Knee Osteoarthritis and Knee Joint Endoprosthesis Using an App","Pilot Study: Development of an Outcome Score for Patients With Knee Osteoarthritis and\u002For Knee Joint Endoprosthesis Using an App Developed at the Clinic for Orthopedics","KneeApp","Inclusion criteria:\n\n* aged 18 years or older\n* german speaking\n* signed informed consent\n* using own smartphone\n\nExclusion criteria:\n\n* age below 18 years.\n* Lack of informed consent\n* no smartphone\n* non-German-speaking",{"count":415,"type":22},1250,[25],"Total knee arthroplasty (TKA) and total hip arthroplasty (THA) is one of the most frequent orthopedic procedures. Over 50% of patients report higher expectations than their surgeons, and 10-50% remain dissatisfied postoperatively. Persistent pain, functional limitations, and unmet expectations are key drivers. Identifying risks pre- and early postoperatively is essential, alongside empowering patients through self-management.\n\nExisting scoring systems integrate PROMs, demographics, and sometimes imaging but within limited timeframes. They rarely capture functional deficits or long-term trajectories. Digital health solutions for TKA (pre-)rehabilitation exist, yet most focus on physiotherapy and education rather than predictive outcome modeling.\n\nTo address this gap, the study team has developed a novel mobile application that enables the documentation and analysis of movement data up to 10 years before surgery and throughout long-term follow-up. These data are combined with PROMs and functional test results, providing a unique basis for outcome prediction and risk stratification in TKA\u002FTHA.\n\nPrimary Objective The aim of this pilot study is to develop a composite outcome score for TKA\u002FTHA patients. This score will integrate demographic variables, PROMs, and objective functional measures (knee joint angles, gait parameters, walk tests) to identify risk factors for dissatisfaction and support predictive modeling. A machine learning algorithm will be trained using the collected dataset to predict patient satisfaction after TKA\u002FTHA.\n\nEndpoints Primary endpoint: Overall patient satisfaction Secondary endpoints: Age, height, weight, step count, step length, gait asymmetry, gait speed, double support phase, knee joint ROM, walk test, KOOS, SF-36, EQ5d, satisfaction with the app, and satisfaction with app use.\n\nStudy Population App-Group: Inclusion criteria are patients ≥18 years before or after TKA\u002FTHA. Exclusion criteria include missing consent, ineligible diagnosis, lack of smartphone, age \\\u003C18 years, or insufficient German language skills (as no English version of the app is currently available). Planned enrollment: 450 patients.\n\nNon-App-Group: Inclusion criteria are patients ≥18 years before or after TKA\u002FTHA. Exclusion criteria include missing consent, ineligible diagnosis, age \\\u003C18 years, or insufficient German language skills (as no English version of the app is currently available). Planned enrollment: 450 patients.\n\nHealthy-group: Inclusion criteria are healthy proband ≥18 years with no lower limb conditions. The overall procedure is identical to that of the AppGroup. Exclusion criteria include missing consent, ineligible diagnosis, no smartphone, age \\\u003C18 years, or insufficient German language skills (as no English version of the app is currently available). Planned enrollment: 450 patients.\n\nMethods Design: Single-center, prospective pilot study. The app collects patient-authorized movement data already stored on smartphones as well as future data. Participants choose which data to share. In addition, they are prompted to complete gait tests and knee function tests. PROMs (KOOS, SF-36, satisfaction) are administered at regular intervals.",[185,419,28,420],"Knee Arthroplasty","Hip Arthroplasty",[422,423,424,425,426,427],"knee","app","arthroplasty","detection","risk score","hip","2026-03-31",{"date":430,"type":37},"2026-04-06",{"date":432,"type":37},"2025-10-01",{"date":434,"type":22},"2028-08-31",{"name":436,"class":44},"Technical University of Munich",{"id":438,"slug":439,"hasResults":12,"nctId":440,"briefTitle":441,"officialTitle":442,"acronym":4,"eligibilityCriteria":443,"healthyVolunteers":12,"sex":18,"minAge":53,"maxAge":4,"enrollmentInfo":444,"targetDuration":4,"studyType":23,"phases":446,"briefSummary":447,"conditions":448,"keywords":449,"overallStatus":61,"whyStopped":4,"lastUpdateSubmitDate":453,"lastUpdatePostDateStruct":454,"startDateStruct":456,"completionDateStruct":458,"leadSponsor":460,"locationsCount":45},"100573531","general-vs-spinal-in-total-joint-arthroplasty-tja-100573531","NCT06747494","General vs Spinal in Total Joint Arthroplasty (TJA)","General Versus Spinal Anesthesia for Total Joint Arthroplasty: A Prospective Randomized Trial","Inclusion Criteria:\n\n* Patients undergoing a primary total hip or knee arthroplasty\n* Subjects must be capable of providing informed consent\n* English or Spanish speaking\n\nExclusion Criteria:\n\nPatients with contraindications for spinal anesthesia such as:\n\n* Prior lumbar surgery with hardware insertion\n* Elevated intracranial pressure\n* Infection at the site of the procedure\n* Thrombocytopenia or coagulopathy\n* Severe mitral and aortic stenosis and left ventricular outflow obstruction\n* Severe spine pathology (spinal stenosis, spondylolisthesis, spondylosis) with radiculopathy and\u002For neurogenic claudication\n* Preexisting neurological disease\n\nPatients with contraindications for general anesthesia such as:\n\n* Congestive heart failure\n* Severe aortic stenosis\n* Patient is unable\u002Funwilling to consent\n* Current pregnancy or women planning on becoming pregnant in the next year, and women who think they might be pregnant, or women who become pregnant during the study period will be removed from the study.\n* Prisoners",{"count":445,"type":22},2396,[25],"The purpose of this research is to compare post-operative outcomes from patients undergoing TJA. The study team wants to learn about outcomes like length of hospital stay, post-operative pain scores, post-operative nausea, deep and superficial surgical site infection, periprosthetic fracture (a broken bone that occurs around an orthopaedic implant), implant dislocation, readmission rates, and revision rates.",[185,28],[450,451,452],"Total joint arthroplasty","General anesthesia","Spinal anesthesia","2026-03-17",{"date":455,"type":37},"2026-03-18",{"date":457,"type":37},"2025-02-01",{"date":459,"type":22},"2030-03-01",{"name":461,"class":44},"University of Miami",{"id":463,"slug":464,"hasResults":12,"nctId":465,"briefTitle":466,"officialTitle":467,"acronym":4,"eligibilityCriteria":468,"healthyVolunteers":12,"sex":18,"minAge":78,"maxAge":54,"enrollmentInfo":469,"targetDuration":4,"studyType":23,"phases":470,"briefSummary":471,"conditions":472,"keywords":4,"overallStatus":61,"whyStopped":4,"lastUpdateSubmitDate":473,"lastUpdatePostDateStruct":474,"startDateStruct":476,"completionDateStruct":478,"leadSponsor":479,"locationsCount":45},"100618111","peng-block-with-dexmedetomidine-in-older-adults-100618111","NCT07327372","PENG Block With Dexmedetomidine in Older Adults","Effect of Perineural Dexmedetomidine as an Adjuvant to Pericapsular Nerve Group Block in Older Adults: A Randomized Controlled Trial","Inclusion Criteria:\n\n* Age 65 years or older\n* Scheduled for elective or emergency hip surgery (e.g., hip fracture fixation or hip arthroplasty)\n* ASA physical status I-III\n* Ability to communicate pain intensity using the NRS scale\n* Written informed consent obtained from the patient or legal representative\n* Planned use of PENG block as part of multimodal perioperative analgesia\n\nExclusion Criteria:\n\n* Patient refusal or inability to provide informed consent\n* Allergy, intolerance, or contraindication to any study medication: ropivacaine, dexmedetomidine\n* Pre-existing neurological deficit or neuropathy of the affected limb\n* Coagulopathy (INR \\>1.5, platelets \\\u003C100,000\u002FµL) or current therapeutic anticoagulation that contraindicates regional anesthesia\n* Infection at or near the injection site\n* Severe hepatic or renal impairment\n* History of chronic opioid use (daily opioids \\>30 days before surgery)\n* Cognitive impairment or delirium precluding reliable pain assessment\n* BMI \\> 40 kg\u002Fm² (if you want to exclude for technical difficulty)\n* Patients receiving another regional nerve block for hip surgery\n* Pregnancy or breastfeeding\n* Participation in another interventional clinical trial within 30 days",{"count":21,"type":22},[25],"Pain after hip surgery is a common problem in older adults and may delay early mobilization, increase the need for opioid pain medications, and contribute to complications such as delirium, nausea, or prolonged hospital stay. Regional anesthesia techniques are increasingly used to improve pain control while reducing the use of systemic opioids.\n\nThe pericapsular nerve group (PENG) block is a modern ultrasound-guided regional anesthesia technique designed to provide effective pain relief after hip surgery while preserving muscle strength. It allows patients to begin mobilization earlier and may reduce the risk of postoperative complications, which is particularly important in older adults.\n\nRopivacaine is a commonly used local anesthetic for nerve blocks. Dexmedetomidine is a medication that, when added in small doses to local anesthetics, may prolong pain relief and improve the quality of nerve blocks without significantly increasing side effects. However, the benefits and safety of adding dexmedetomidine to the PENG block in older adults have not been sufficiently studied.\n\nThe aim of this randomized controlled clinical study is to compare the effectiveness and safety of two PENG block techniques in older adults undergoing hip surgery. Participants will be randomly assigned to one of two groups. One group will receive a PENG block with 20 mL of 0.2% ropivacaine. The second group will receive a PENG block with 20 mL of 0.2% ropivacaine combined with 25 micrograms of dexmedetomidine.\n\nThe study hypothesis is that the addition of dexmedetomidine to ropivacaine in the PENG block will provide longer-lasting and more effective postoperative pain relief compared with ropivacaine alone, without increasing adverse effects. Outcomes assessed in the study will include postoperative pain intensity, need for additional pain medications, time to first mobilization, and the occurrence of side effects such as low blood pressure, slow heart rate, excessive sedation, or delirium.\n\nThe results of this study may help optimize regional anesthesia techniques for hip surgery in older adults and contribute to safer, more effective postoperative pain management strategies.",[28,102],"2026-03-02",{"date":475,"type":37},"2026-03-04",{"date":477,"type":37},"2026-02-06",{"date":106,"type":22},{"name":70,"class":44},{"id":481,"slug":482,"hasResults":12,"nctId":483,"briefTitle":484,"officialTitle":485,"acronym":4,"eligibilityCriteria":486,"healthyVolunteers":12,"sex":18,"minAge":78,"maxAge":54,"enrollmentInfo":487,"targetDuration":4,"studyType":23,"phases":489,"briefSummary":490,"conditions":491,"keywords":4,"overallStatus":61,"whyStopped":4,"lastUpdateSubmitDate":473,"lastUpdatePostDateStruct":492,"startDateStruct":493,"completionDateStruct":494,"leadSponsor":495,"locationsCount":45},"100615159","peng-block-vs-suprainguinal-ficb-vs-lumbar-espb-for-analgesia-after-hip-surgery-100615159","NCT07288983","PENG Block vs Suprainguinal FICB vs Lumbar ESPB for Analgesia After Hip Surgery","A Randomized, Double-Blinded, Controlled Trial Comparing the Analgesic Efficacy and Motor-Sparing Properties of the Pericapsular Nerve Group (PENG) Block, Suprainguinal Fascia Iliaca Compartment Block (S-FICB), and Lumbar Erector Spinae Plane Block (L-ESPB) in Patients Undergoing Hip Arthroplasty","Inclusion Criteria:\n\n* Adults aged 65 years or older scheduled to undergo elective hip arthroplasty under spinal anesthesia.\n* Ability to provide written informed consent.\n* Ability to understand and reliably use numerical pain assessment tools (NRS 0-10).\n* ASA physical status II-III.\n* Expected postoperative hospitalization of at least 48 hours to ensure complete data collection.\n\nExclusion Criteria:\n\n* Inability to provide informed consent due to cognitive impairment, language barrier, or severe hearing\u002Fspeech limitations.\n* Coagulopathy or therapeutic anticoagulation not meeting safety criteria for regional anesthesia.\n* Local infection at the planned block site.\n* Allergy, hypersensitivity, or contraindication to ropivacaine, local anesthetics, or study medications.\n* Pre-existing lower-limb neurological deficits (motor or sensory) affecting outcome assessments.\n* Severe spinal deformity or anatomical limitations preventing safe performance of regional blocks.\n* Chronic opioid use (defined as \\>30 mg oral morphine equivalents daily for more than 2 weeks).\n* Severe renal failure (eGFR \\\u003C30 mL\u002Fmin\u002F1.73m²) or severe hepatic impairment.\n* Uncontrolled diabetes mellitus (fasting glucose \\>300 mg\u002FdL or HbA1c \\>10%).\n* History of local anesthetic systemic toxicity (LAST).\n* Participation in another interventional clinical trial within the past 30 days.\n* Any condition deemed by investigators to interfere with protocol adherence, safety monitoring, or outcome reliability.",{"count":488,"type":22},93,[25],"This randomized, double-blinded, controlled clinical trial compares three motor-sparing regional anesthesia techniques used for postoperative analgesia in patients undergoing hip arthroplasty: the Pericapsular Nerve Group (PENG) block, the suprainguinal Fascia Iliaca Compartment Block (S-FICB), and the Lumbar Erector Spinae Plane Block (L-ESPB). Although all three techniques are widely used in modern hip surgery, their relative analgesic efficacy, opioid-sparing potential, and impact on early functional recovery have not been directly compared in a single study.\n\nThe primary objective is to determine which block provides the most effective postoperative analgesia while preserving motor function and facilitating early mobilization. Secondary objectives include comparisons of opioid consumption, pain scores at rest and during movement, time to first rescue analgesia, block-related adverse events, quadriceps strength, incidence of postoperative nausea and vomiting, and early functional outcomes.\n\nThis study aims to identify the optimal motor-sparing regional anesthesia strategy for older adults undergoing hip arthroplasty.",[28],{"date":475,"type":37},{"date":477,"type":37},{"date":287,"type":22},{"name":70,"class":44},{"id":497,"slug":498,"hasResults":12,"nctId":499,"briefTitle":500,"officialTitle":500,"acronym":501,"eligibilityCriteria":502,"healthyVolunteers":12,"sex":18,"minAge":503,"maxAge":4,"enrollmentInfo":504,"targetDuration":4,"studyType":23,"phases":505,"briefSummary":506,"conditions":507,"keywords":4,"overallStatus":61,"whyStopped":4,"lastUpdateSubmitDate":508,"lastUpdatePostDateStruct":509,"startDateStruct":511,"completionDateStruct":513,"leadSponsor":514,"locationsCount":516},"100546178","effects-of-education-and-exercise-compared-to-education-alone-on-clinical-and-physiological-outcomes-in-patients-with-hip-osteoarthritis-100546178","NCT06391554","Effects of EDUcation and EXercise Compared to Education Alone on Clinical and Physiological Outcomes in Patients With Hip Osteoarthritis","EDUEX","Inclusion Criteria:\n\n* Clinically diagnosed with hip OA according to the criteria by the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE)\n* Radiographic verification of hip OA diagnosis with Kellgren Lawrence score of 2 or 3 in one or both hips\n* Not scheduled for a total hip replacement within the following 12 months\n* An event of hip pain every day of at least 3 out of 10 on a numerical rating scale during the last 14 days\n* Age ≥ 45 years\n* Adequacy in written and spoken Danish\n\nExclusion Criteria:\n\n* Comorbidity that markedly influences hip function or degeneration of tissue in or around the hip joint (rheumatic, neurological, mental or other)\n* Surgery in the lower extremities within the six months prior to inclusion\n* BMI \\> 40\n* Pregnancy\n* Resistance exercise (weights or elastic bands) for the lower extremities exceeding 12 sessions over the last 6 months or 6 sessions over the last 3 months\n* Suffering from claustrophobia or not tolerating whole body MRI scanner\n* Metallic implants from the waist to just above the knee\n* Pacemaker or other medical devices that are not MR approved","45 Years",{"count":385,"type":22},[25],"The EDUEX trial will determine whether the addition of progressive resistance training (PRT) to a patient education program (EDU) will improve clinical outcomes in patients with hip OA.\n\nIn a subsample, the effect of PRT on the articular cartilage and other structures of the hip joint is investigated. In this subsample, a comprehensive assessment of possible mechanisms underlying the effects of exercise on pain and function is undertaken.\n\nThe EduEx trial will be a multicentre, stratified (by site), block randomized (allocation 1:1), controlled, parallel-group superiority trial. 150 people with hip OA will be recruited from hospitals, physiotherapy clinics, social media and newspapers. Participants will be randomized to PRT and EDU or EDU alone. All 150 participants will be included in the clinical evaluation study (CLIN). The last 40 participants randomized to PRT+EDU and to EDU, respectively, will also be included in the mechanistic (MECH) evaluation study (n=80), by being asked to participate in additional outcome assessments. The primary endpoint will be the 12 months follow-up for both the CLIN and MECH study, while a secondary endpoint will be the 3-month follow-up.",[28],"2026-02-16",{"date":510,"type":37},"2026-02-18",{"date":512,"type":37},"2024-05-01",{"date":327,"type":22},{"name":515,"class":44},"University of Aarhus",2,{"id":518,"slug":519,"hasResults":12,"nctId":520,"briefTitle":521,"officialTitle":522,"acronym":4,"eligibilityCriteria":523,"healthyVolunteers":12,"sex":18,"minAge":53,"maxAge":4,"enrollmentInfo":524,"targetDuration":4,"studyType":178,"phases":4,"briefSummary":526,"conditions":527,"keywords":529,"overallStatus":61,"whyStopped":4,"lastUpdateSubmitDate":531,"lastUpdatePostDateStruct":532,"startDateStruct":533,"completionDateStruct":535,"leadSponsor":537,"locationsCount":516},"100491168","return-to-golf-after-orthopaedic-surgery-100491168","NCT05675618","Return to Golf After Orthopaedic Surgery","Golfing After Orthopaedic Surgery: a Longitudinal Follow-up (GOLF) Project","Inclusion Criteria:\n\n* Age 18+ years\n* A self-reported golfer\n* Able to consent to treatment\n* Indicated for one of the following surgical procedures: total hip arthroplasty, hip resurfacing, revision hip arthroplasty, total knee arthroplasty, unicompartmental knee arthroplasty, revision knee arthroplasty, total shoulder arthroplasty, reverse shoulder arthroplasty, shoulder resurfacing arthroplasty, revision shoulder arthroplasty\n\nExclusion Criteria:\n\n* Inability to complete follow-up questionnaires\n* Declining operative management\n* No desire to return to golf postoperatively\n* Medical problem that affects the patient's ability to play golf (e.g., angina, shortness of breath, etc.)",{"count":525,"type":22},432,"The GOLF study is a multicenter, prospective study with the goal to investigate golfers' return to the sport following hip, knee or shoulder arthroplasty. The prevalence of return to golf, by level of returning to golf will be assessed at 6 weeks, 3 months, 6 months, and 12 months postoperatively. Patients who are active golfers undergoing joint replacement will be identified from outpatient clinics and pre-assessment clinics and given information about the study at least two weeks prior to surgery. Participants in this study must have a desire to return to golf after surgery. Previous studies have only been able to report the return to golf after arthroplasty retrospectively; the prospective nature of this study will allow for a greater understanding of this process.",[28,185,528],"Shoulder Osteoarthritis",[530],"return to golf, arthroplasty","2026-02-11",{"date":285,"type":37},{"date":534,"type":37},"2023-01-09",{"date":536,"type":22},"2026-12",{"name":538,"class":44},"Hospital for Special Surgery, New York",{"id":540,"slug":541,"hasResults":12,"nctId":542,"briefTitle":543,"officialTitle":544,"acronym":4,"eligibilityCriteria":545,"healthyVolunteers":12,"sex":18,"minAge":53,"maxAge":4,"enrollmentInfo":546,"targetDuration":4,"studyType":23,"phases":548,"briefSummary":549,"conditions":550,"keywords":4,"overallStatus":33,"whyStopped":4,"lastUpdateSubmitDate":551,"lastUpdatePostDateStruct":552,"startDateStruct":554,"completionDateStruct":555,"leadSponsor":557,"locationsCount":45},"100611219","alexis-retractor-in-total-hip-arthroplasty-100611219","NCT07237737","Alexis Retractor in Total Hip Arthroplasty","Wound Healing Outcomes With and Without the Alexis Wound Retractor in Direct Anterior Approach Total Hip Arthroplasty","Inclusion Criteria:\n\n* Patients undergoing primary unilateral longitudinal direct anterior approach total hip arthroplasty\n* Patients undergoing primary total hip arthroplasty\n\nExclusion Criteria:\n\n* Patients with history of prior open surgery on the affected hip\n* Patients with history of prior total hip arthroplasty on the contralateral hip\n* Patients with allergies or absolute contraindication to standardized drugs administered within the University of Miami protocol for total hip replacement",{"count":547,"type":22},202,[25],"To determine if there is a difference in wound healing and surgical site infection (SSI) rates using the Alexis wound retractor vs. not using it in longitudinal direct anterior approach total hip arthroplasty.",[28,240],"2026-02-03",{"date":553,"type":37},"2026-02-05",{"date":536,"type":22},{"date":556,"type":22},"2028-01",{"name":461,"class":44},{"id":559,"slug":560,"hasResults":12,"nctId":561,"briefTitle":562,"officialTitle":563,"acronym":4,"eligibilityCriteria":564,"healthyVolunteers":12,"sex":18,"minAge":53,"maxAge":4,"enrollmentInfo":565,"targetDuration":4,"studyType":23,"phases":567,"briefSummary":568,"conditions":569,"keywords":4,"overallStatus":61,"whyStopped":4,"lastUpdateSubmitDate":551,"lastUpdatePostDateStruct":571,"startDateStruct":572,"completionDateStruct":574,"leadSponsor":576,"locationsCount":516},"100600945","influence-of-antiseptic-washes-on-wound-healing-complications-after-tha-100600945","NCT07104084","Influence of Antiseptic Washes on Wound Healing Complications After THA","Comparison of Wound Healing Complications After Anterior Total Hip Arthroplasty Using Povidone-iodine or Chlorhexidine as Antiseptic Wash","Inclusion Criteria:\n\n* osteoarthritis or avascular necrosis of the femoral head, failed conservative management, indicated for total hip replacement\n\nExclusion Criteria:\n\n* reported or documented allergy to chlorhexidine or povidone-iodine",{"count":566,"type":22},420,[25],"The purpose of this research trial is to evaluate the effect of two types of washing solutions on wound healing after total hip replacement surgery. Washing solutions are used routinely during total hip replacements to clean the wound after the components have been placed and the wound is about to be closed with sutures. It is currently not known which washing solution may be better for wound healing and whether a certain solution decreases the risk of wound healing complications after total hip replacement. Therefore, this research trial is being conducted.\n\nStudy participants will be randomized into one of two groups: washing the surgical wound with povidone-iodine solution (Surgiphor, Becton Dickinson, Franklin Lakes, NJ) or chlorhexidine solution (Irrisept, Irrimax Corporation, Lawrenceville, GA). All patients will undergo standard of care total hip replacements without any other change in surgery. The best type of solution that cleans the wound and potentially leads to better wound healing is unknown. This study will evaluate whether there is difference in surgical wound healing between the two washing solutions. The study will pay for the washing solutions. Patients will follow up for standard postoperative visits. At the 2-week and 6-week visits, pictures of the surgical incision will be taken and saved in the electronic medical record and evaluated in a standardized way for healing of the incision and the appearance of the scar. Postoperative complications and returns to the hospital or additional surgeries will be collected from the electronic medical record.",[28,570],"Avascular Necrosis of Femur Head",{"date":553,"type":37},{"date":573,"type":37},"2025-10-09",{"date":575,"type":22},"2028-01-01",{"name":577,"class":44},"F. Johannes Plate",{"id":579,"slug":580,"hasResults":12,"nctId":581,"briefTitle":582,"officialTitle":583,"acronym":4,"eligibilityCriteria":584,"healthyVolunteers":12,"sex":18,"minAge":53,"maxAge":4,"enrollmentInfo":585,"targetDuration":4,"studyType":178,"phases":4,"briefSummary":587,"conditions":588,"keywords":590,"overallStatus":61,"whyStopped":4,"lastUpdateSubmitDate":592,"lastUpdatePostDateStruct":593,"startDateStruct":595,"completionDateStruct":597,"leadSponsor":599,"locationsCount":45},"100543702","h-34-delta-revision-cup-100543702","NCT06359301","H-34 DELTA Revision Cup","An Open Label, Observational, Prospective, Longitudinal Cohort Study to Evaluate Safety, Clinical and Radiographic Outcomes of Total Hip Arthroplasty With DELTA Revision Cup","Inclusion Criteria:\n\n* male or female in whom a decision has already been made to perform a total hip arthroplasty with DELTA Revision acetabular cup as per indication for use. The decision to implant DELTA revision acetabular cup must be taken prior to, and independently from the decision to enroll the patient. This decision should be made in accorsance with routine clinical practice at the study site concerned.\n* Age ≥ 18 years old\n* All patients mist give written informed consent approved by the study site's Institutinal Review Board (IRB)\u002FEthical Committee (EC)\n* Patient is able to comply with the protocol\n\nExclusion Criteria:\n\n* Adult patients with any DELTA Revision acetabular cup contraindication for use as reported in the current local instruction for use.\n* For female patiens, current pregnancy and\u002For lactation or planning a pregnancy",{"count":586,"type":22},49,"THis study is aimed to provide a clinical and radiographic evaluation of 49 suitable subjects who underwent a total hip arthroplasty with DELTA Revision acetabular cup.",[589],"Hip, Osteoarthritis",[591],"revision","2026-01-20",{"date":594,"type":37},"2026-01-22",{"date":596,"type":37},"2021-09-14",{"date":598,"type":22},"2028-12",{"name":600,"class":601},"Limacorporate S.p.a","INDUSTRY"]