Osteoarthritis, Knee

The purpose of this prospective, randomized, open-label, active-controlled clinical trial is to evaluate the clinical and sonographic effects of ultrasound-guided (US-guided) high-volume saphenous nerve block combined with intra-articular corticosteroid injection compared to intra-articular corticosteroid injection alone in patients with Kellgren-Lawrence Grade 3-4 medial compartment knee osteoarthritis (OA) refractory to conservative treatment. A total of 60 participants aged 45-75 years will be randomly assigned (1:1) into two treatment arms: * Group 1: US-guided intra-articular corticosteroid injection (40 mg triamcinolone acetonide + 1 mL saline) + home exercise program. * Group 2: US-guided intra-articular corticosteroid injection + US-guided high-volume saphenous nerve block (10 mL 0.2% bupivacaine solution) + home exercise program. Clinical assessments (WOMAC, VAS, and SF-36) will be conducted at baseline (T0), 1st month (T1), 3rd month (T2), and 6th month (T3). Sonographic evaluations, including saphenous nerve cross-sectional area (CSA) and perineural vascularity via Power Doppler US, will be performed at baseline (T0), 1st month (T1), and 6th month (T3). The primary outcome is functional improvement measured by the change in WOMAC total score.

The purpose of the chronic pain master protocol is to compare independent pain interventions and establish an overarching structure for the disease-state addenda (DSA) and intervention-specific appendices (ISAs). The ISAs may start independently of other ISAs as interventions become available for clinical testing.

Many patients who receive knee replacement surgery must return for a revision (or repeat) surgery due to ongoing pain, stiffness, infection, or implant loosening. The role of the gut microbiome-the collection of bacteria and other microbes within the human gastrointestinal tract-is just beginning to be recognized in orthopaedics. The gut microbiome has been found to affect the immune response and bone regulation, potentially contributing to infection or loosening after total joint replacement. Antibiotics are regularly used in orthopaedic surgery to reduce the risk of infection, yet they might also harm gut microbiota and reduce their potentially beneficial effects. As a result, understanding the relationship between gut microbiota and surgical outcomes has become increasingly important. Therefore, this study aims to determine if there are differences in gut microbiota composition between patients with well-functioning knee replacements and those requiring revision knee replacements. Additional study aims include assessing inflammation, implant loosening, metal ion levels, and circulating bacteria in blood or tissue between well-functioning or failed knee replacements.

Osteoarthritis (OA) is the most common joint disease, causing severe pain due to joint inflammation (synovitis). While total knee arthroplasty (TKA) is commonly performed to reduce pain, 20% of patients are dissatisfied with their outcome post-surgery. This dissatisfaction is caused by persistent pain post-TKA due to synovitis that is not routinely removed during surgery. To address this problem, a synovectomy can be performed during TKA, which involves resecting the inflamed layer of tissue lining the joint, called the synovium, and its associated sensory nerve endings. Since the synovium will regenerate in the months post-surgery, synovectomy only transiently reduces pain after TKA. The proposed study will help ascertain the benefits and effects of synovectomy in patients who are more likely to experience poor satisfaction (driven mostly by pain) post-TKA. This study will include 62 patients undergoing TKA due to end-stage OA who have moderate to severe synovitis, as determined by ultrasound assessment. Patients will be randomized (1:1) to undergo a TKA with synovectomy or without synovectomy. Primary and secondary outcomes will be assessed through patient-reported levels of pain and function, results from physical performance tests, and quality of life (QOL) scores. These measures will be recorded pre- and post-surgery for comparison. Through demonstrating that synovectomy can at least transiently reduce pain post-TKA, this study will provide evidence for the development of medical therapies that target the synovium to slow its regrowth. This will be transformative for the long-term management of joint pain and synovitis post-surgery, thus significantly improving patients' overall QOL.

This cross-sectional study aims to evaluate the accuracy of multi-echo fast field echo (mFFE) MRI in depicting cortical bone changes in knee osteoarthritis compared with CT.

The purpose of the study is to assess the effect of Tranexamic acid (TXa), a commonly used medication to prevent bleeding, in reducing blood loss during High Tibial Osteotomy (HTO). HTO is a common procedure aimed at realigning patients that are bow-legged, in an attempt to reduce pain associated with osteoarthritis of the knee, and to prevent its progression. A secondary aim is to assess the effect of TXa in preventing side-effects of surgery related to the healing of surgical wound.

The goal of this clinical trial is to learn if the VELYS Robotic-Assisted Solution (VRAS) device helps to improve outcomes from total knee replacement, when compared to regular non-robotic-assisted total knee replacement in the treatment of osteoarthritis. It will also aim to review the longer-term safety and efficiency effects of using this device. The main questions it aims to answer are: 1. Does VRAS device-assisted total knee replacement improve patient outcomes (such as their function, satisfaction, and pain) when compared to non-robotic-assisted total knee replacement? 2. Does VRAS device-assisted total knee replacement improve clinical outcomes (such as revision risk, complications, and hospital length of stay) when compared to non-robotic-assisted total knee replacement? 3. Does VRAS device-assisted total knee replacement improve functional outcomes (including biomechanical motion analysis) when compared to non-robotic-assisted total knee replacement? 4. What are the economic and efficiency effects of VRAS device-assisted total knee replacement compared to non-robotic-assisted total knee replacement? 5. What are the human factor and learning curve effects of introducing VRAS device-assisted total knee replacement into healthcare teams? 6. Are there any differences in safety and adverse event incidence between VRAS device-assisted total knee replacement and non-robotic-assisted total knee replacement? Participants will: * Be randomised to receive a total knee replacement using either regular non-robotic-assisted methods, or with the use of the VRAS device. * Be assessed pre-operatively at the clinic, and then at 6 weeks, 6 months, and 12 months following date of operation. At these appointments patients will answer questionnaires, receive an x-ray (pre-operatively, and at 6 months post-operatively), and a subgroup will be reviewed in the motion analysis laboratory (pre-operatively, and at 6 months post-operatively). * Have their longer-term outcomes including any revision operations monitored out to 10 years through national registry data linkage (no actual follow-up for patients after 12 months).

The main purpose of this study is to test the safety and efficacy of study drug for the treatment of knee pain due to osteoarthritis (OA). This trial is part of the chronic pain master protocol H0P-MC-CPMP (NCT05986292), which is a protocol to accelerate the development of new treatments for chronic pain.

This clinical trial is being done to better understand how daily treatment with Tetrahydrocannabinol (THC), Cannabidiol (CBD), or the combination of CBD plus THC affects knee osteoarthritis pain and other related symptoms. Consented participants will have a screening period and visit (up to 30 days to treatment start). If participants pass the screening phase, they will be randomly assigned to take one of the investigational study drugs. For this study, participants will not know when or if they are taking CBD, THC, THC plus CBD, and when or if taking placebo. Clinical pain will be assessed at multiple times throughout the study, and eligibility will be re-assessed at two weeks into the treatment period. It is possible that subjects will not be able to participate in the study after 14 days of of treatment. The treatment period will take approximately 16 weeks and then a follow-up period for approximately 2 weeks. In addition to treatment, participants will have clinical assessments, blood draws, questionnaires, daily pain diaries, sensory testing, as well as have functional connectivity magnetic resonance imaging (fcMRI).

The purpose of this study is to evaluate and compare the effects of two different collagen supplement formulations on pain, physical function, and overall quality of life in adults with knee osteoarthritis. Knee osteoarthritis is a common joint disease characterized by cartilage degeneration, which leads to chronic pain and reduced mobility. While collagen supplements are frequently used to support joint health, their clinical effectiveness is usually measured using traditional pain scales. However, osteoarthritis pain is complex and multidimensional, often involving different patterns (such as constant or intermittent pain) and central neurological sensitization. This study aims to use a holistic approach to understand how collagen supplements affect these complex pain experiences using comprehensive patient-reported outcome measures. Participants in this study will be adults between the ages of 35 and 65 who have been diagnosed with unilateral knee osteoarthritis (Kellgren-Lawrence grade 2 or 3). Participants will be randomly assigned to one of three groups: Hydrolyzed Collagen Group: Participants will consume a daily sachet containing 10 grams of enzymatically hydrolyzed bovine collagen peptide. Bioactive Collagen Peptide Group: Participants will consume a daily sachet containing 5 grams of lower molecular weight bovine collagen peptide mixed with 5 grams of maltodextrin. Placebo Group: Participants will consume a daily sachet containing 10 grams of maltodextrin (with no active collagen or protein), matching the active supplements in taste, smell, and appearance. All participants will take their assigned supplement once daily for 8 weeks. To ensure unbiased results, the study is double-blind, meaning neither the participants nor the research staff evaluating the outcomes will know which group a participant is in. Researchers will assess the participants at the beginning of the study (baseline) and at the end of the 8-week intervention. Assessments will be conducted using various established questionnaires to measure joint stiffness, physical limitations, general quality of life, and specific pain patterns, including central sensitization. The study will be conducted at the Orthopedics and Traumatology Clinic of Cesme Alper Cizgenakat State Hospital in Türkiye. By looking beyond traditional clinical scales, this research aims to provide a deeper understanding of how different collagen formulations can improve the daily lives and complex pain symptoms of patients living with knee osteoarthritis.

The primary aim of this study is to investigate whether low-dose radiotherapy is an effective treatment to reduce the pain of knee osteoarthritis. A secondary aim is to determine whether patients experience any more measurable side effects than those receiving sham treatments.

ABLE OA is a Health Canada authorized (phase II/III) trial \[Parent Control #: 263591\]. A multi-center, prospective, double-blinded, randomized, placebo-controlled adaptive trial to evaluate the efficacy of two minimally manipulated autologous cellular preparations i) bone marrow aspirate (BMA) injection; and, ii) combined lipoaspirate micronized (LAM) and leukocyte poor (LP) platelet-rich plasma (PRP) injections for the treatment of knee osteoarthritis (OA). BMA, LAM from lipoaspirate (LA), and LP-PRP from whole blood will be prepared using the Cervos Marrow Cellution™ Bone Marrow Aspiration System, Cervos LIPO-PRO™ Adipose Transfer System, and Cervos KEYPRP Platelet Separator System, respectively. Patient-reported outcome (PRO) measures will be collected using web- or paper-based questionnaires administered at baseline (pre-injection) as well as at 3, 6 and 12 months (post-injection). Blood, synovial fluid, and urine samples will be collected at baseline pre-injection and 6 months post-injection only.

This study is being done to look at the safety and effect of NNC0487-0111 in people with excess body weight and knee osteoarthritis when compared to placebo. There are 2 study treatments in this study taken as injections under the skin once a week. Participants will either get NNC0487-0111, (the treatment being tested) or Placebo (a treatment that has no active medicine in it). Which treatment participants get is decided by chance.

The goal of this randomized clinical trial is to learn whether taking ibuprofen, a nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug, after a platelet-rich plasma (PRP) injection changes pain relief and knee function in adults with knee osteoarthritis. The main questions it aims to answer are: Does ibuprofen change the improvement in knee pain six months after a PRP injection compared with acetaminophen? Does ibuprofen change knee function or the need for additional pain medicine during follow-up? Researchers will compare PRP followed by ibuprofen with PRP followed by acetaminophen. Participants will receive one ultrasound-guided PRP injection and take the assigned medication every eight hours for five days. They will complete assessments of pain, knee function, additional pain medicine use, and safety. Participants and the physician performing the injection will not know which medication was assigned.

The goal of this randomised controlled feasibility trial is to find out whether it is possible to run a larger study of the Good Boost+ community based rehabilitation programme for people waiting for a primary total knee replacement. The study will look at how many people are willing to take part, whether they stay in the study, and whether they can follow the Good Boost+ programme as planned. It will also explore how acceptable the programme is to patients, NHS staff and leisure centre staff, and which outcome measures are most useful for a future full scale trial. The study will also look at what helps or hinders delivery of the programme in real world NHS and community settings. The main questions it aims to answer are: * How many people waiting for knee replacement surgery are willing to take part in the study * Whether participants can continue with the Good Boost+ programme as planned over the study period * Which outcome measures best capture any potential benefits of the programme * How acceptable the programme is to patients, NHS and leisure centre staff * What helps or makes it difficult to deliver the programme in practice. Participants will be randomly assigned to one of two groups. * Usual NHS care or * Usual NHS care plus the Good Boost+ programme Participants in the Good Boost+ programme will take part in six weekly group water based exercise sessions held in local swimming pools, as well as land based exercise sessions that can be done individually or by joining a virtual group. The exercise sessions are delivered through Good Boost's digital technology, using small waterproof tablet computers at swimming pools, and smartphones or computers for land-based sessions. Physiotherapy staff will provide guidance throughout, and volunteers will offer refreshments after pool sessions to support social connection. All participants, including those receiving usual NHS care only, will be asked to complete an exercise diary, rate their knee pain each week, and complete short questionnaires at 6 and 10 weeks after joining the study.

This project, conducted within the Department of Veterans Affairs Healthcare System (VHA), will test the effectiveness of an intervention to improve adherence to home exercise among Veterans receiving physical therapy (PT) for knee osteoarthritis (OA). The intervention, "Boosting Exercise Adherence in Knee Osteoarthritis" (BOOST-OA), has two phases. During the initiation phase (first 3 months of PT care), patients will receive tools and activities to address outcome expectations, action self-efficacy, goal-setting and monitoring. During the behavior maintenance phase (starting after PT care and continuing for 9 months), patients will receive health coaching calls that address satisfaction with outcomes, relapse prevention planning and independent monitoring. There are three main study aims: (1) examine improvements in patient outcomes, such as physical function, following BOOST-OA; (2) explore patient characteristics that lead to difference in reported improvements; and (3) interview participants and clinicians about their experience with BOOST-OA to inform future implementation.

The goal of this study is to establish the efficacy of an intervention of dietary weight loss, exercise, and weight-loss maintenance for knee Osteoarthritis (OA) prevention in adult females aged ≥ 50 years with obesity and no or infrequent knee pain. The primary aim is to compare the effects of a dietary weight loss, exercise, and weight-loss maintenance to an attention control group in preventing the development of structural Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) knee OA. Secondary aims will determine the intervention effects on pain, mobility, health-related quality of life, knee joint compressive forces, inflammatory measures, weight loss, exercise self-efficacy, and cost-effectiveness of this intervention.

The goal of this clinical trial is to learn whether robotic-assisted total knee replacement improves recovery compared with conventional total knee replacement in adults with knee osteoarthritis when both groups follow the same structured home-based rehabilitation program. Robotic-assisted and conventional (non-robotic) total knee replacement are both widely used as part of routine clinical care. This study will compare recovery during the first six weeks after surgery. The main questions the study aims to answer are: 1. Does robotic-assisted total knee replacement improve knee pain and knee function six weeks after surgery compared with conventional total knee replacement? 2. Does robotic-assisted surgery improve physical function, walking ability, leg strength, quality of life, and participants' experience of rehabilitation? 3. Are there any differences in recovery, length of hospital stay, or safety between the two surgical approaches? Researchers will compare robotic-assisted total knee replacement with conventional total knee replacement. Both groups will complete the same rehabilitation program before and after surgery so that any differences in recovery are more likely to be related to the type of surgery rather than differences in rehabilitation. Participants will: * Be randomly assigned (by chance, similar to flipping a coin) to receive either robotic-assisted or conventional total knee replacement surgery. * Complete a structured rehabilitation program that includes education and exercises during the four weeks before surgery and a home-based exercise program for six weeks after surgery. * Use a study-provided seated exercise bike, receive support from a physiotherapist through telehealth appointments, secure messaging, and home visits where required, and use a digital application to guide the rehabilitation program and record exercise completion and symptoms. * Complete questionnaires about knee pain, knee function, general health, quality of life, and satisfaction with the rehabilitation program. * Attend study assessments before surgery, immediately before surgery after completing the pre-surgery program, and about six weeks after surgery. These assessments include simple physical activities such as standing up from a chair, walking, cycling, and measuring leg strength. * Allow information about their surgery and hospital stay, such as the duration of surgery and the number of nights spent in hospital, to be recorded for the study. The results of this study will help researchers understand whether robotic-assisted total knee replacement provides additional benefits over conventional total knee replacement when both are combined with the same structured home-based rehabilitation program. The findings may help patients, healthcare professionals, and health services make informed decisions about the use of robotic-assisted knee replacement surgery.

Prospective, multicenter, two-arm, 2:1 randomized controlled trial (RCT) comparing the benefits in subjects with medial knee osteoarthritis who are treated with either the MISHA Knee System or with non-surgical treatment. This is the first randomized head-to-head study comparing outcomes from subjects treated with the MISHA Knee System.

This clinical trial is conducted to compare and evaluate the efficacy and safety of Tergase injection (4,500 IU) in reducing postoperative edema between treated and untreated knees in patients undergoing bilateral total knee arthroplasty (TKA). Prior to participation, all subjects receive a full explanation of the study and provide voluntary written informed consent. Only subjects who meet the inclusion and exclusion criteria through screening procedures are enrolled. Enrolled subjects are randomly assigned to the experimental and control groups in a 1:1 ratio per knee, utilizing a split-body clinical trial design that compares both knees of the same subject. The analysis target is 60 knees obtained from a total of 30 subjects. According to the randomization results, the knee assigned to the experimental group receives a subcutaneous injection of 3 vials (4,500 IU) of Tergase, while the contralateral knee serves as the untreated control group. By including both the experimental and control groups within the same subject, inter-individual variation is minimized. While the investigator performing the injection is aware of the assignment, the subject remains blinded. To overcome the physical impossibility of blinding the injector due to the route of administration and drug characteristics, an 'Evaluator-Blinded' design is adopted to maintain objectivity equivalent to a double-blind study. To achieve this, the unblinded injector and the blinded evaluator who measures efficacy outcomes are strictly separated, and operational blinding is maintained by blocking information exchange between the two groups. Subjects are evaluated for efficacy and safety during hospitalization or outpatient visits at Day 1, 2, 3, 5, Week 2, Week 6, and Month 3 after bilateral TKA. Participation ends upon completion of the planned visits.

The purpose of this study is to investigate the relationship between the clinical and radiographic severity of knee osteoarthritis (OA) and the serum levels of specific biomarkers, namely Fetuin-A and Cartilage Oligomeric Matrix Protein (COMP). Osteoarthritis is a degenerative joint disease characterized by cartilage breakdown and low-grade inflammation. Investigating these biomarkers may help healthcare providers better understand the disease pathology, potentially leading to earlier diagnosis and improved tracking of disease progression. The study will compare two distinct groups: a patient group consisting of 120 individuals diagnosed with Grade 2-4 knee osteoarthritis, and a control group of 60 age- and sex-matched healthy volunteers with no history of joint disorders. Participants will undergo radiographic evaluations using the Kellgren-Lawrence classification system, alongside clinical and functional assessments, including pain severity scales, mobility metrics, and functional questionnaires. Fasting blood samples will be collected from all participants to measure serum Fetuin-A and COMP levels via laboratory analysis, and the Systemic Inflammation Response Index (SIRI) will be calculated. The collected data will be statistically analyzed to determine if biomarker levels significantly correlate with the severity of knee joint degeneration and functional impairment.

Brief Summary The goal of this pilot study is to evaluate the feasibility and safety of conducting a randomized comparison of two standard-of-care knee radiofrequency ablation (RFA) techniques in adults with chronic knee pain related to knee osteoarthritis. Participants who are already scheduled to receive knee RFA as part of their standard clinical care will be randomized to receive either a standard 3-target (standard) RFA protocol or a 6-target (novel) RFA protocol. The main purpose of this pilot study is to determine whether a future larger randomized trial comparing these two RFA approaches is feasible and safe to conduct. Participants will complete questionnaires about pain, knee function, and stiffness at baseline and at follow-up timepoints for up to 12 months after the RFA procedure. Preliminary pain relief outcomes will also be explored to help inform the design of a future definitive trial. Participants already scheduled for a knee RFA procedure as part of their standard of care for pain related to knee osteoarthritis will answer online survey questions about their pain for up to 12 months.

Osteoarthritis is the most common degenerative condition affecting the knee joint globally, with an incidence of about 7% of the population. In Italy, it affects approximately 3.9 million people, with a direct treatment cost of around €2.5 billion. At the joint level, osteoarthritis manifests with pain and reduced functionality, worsening as the disease progresses and severely limiting knee movement. Compounding this, osteoarthritis can impact both elderly and younger individuals due to traumatic factors. Despite its significant impact, effective treatments for osteoarthritis that address its underlying causes are still lacking, focusing mainly on symptom management. Therefore, improving diagnostic and prognostic approaches is crucial to better understand its onset and progression. MRI is a primary diagnostic tool for assessing the knee joint's pathophysiological state. It uses tissue-specific sequences to investigate joint homeostasis in detail, although it primarily provides insights into morphology, structure, and tissue composition rather than functional changes within the joint. This limitation is noteworthy because joint homeostasis involves complex interactions among biomechanical, structural, and biological processes, which are directly influenced by osteoarthritis. Gait analysis provides valuable diagnostic information on joint function. By integrating sensor measurements and electronic systems with patient-specific musculoskeletal models derived from MRI morphometric data, it is possible to assess the forces and moments within the joint during specific movements. Given that osteoarthritis affects the entire joint, employing multidisciplinary approaches can enhance diagnostic precision and provide insights into the progressive impact of degenerative conditions like osteoarthritis on joint health.

This study investigates how well individuals with knee osteoarthritis can learn to alter their calf muscle activation using haptic biofeedback while walking and evaluates how these changes affect knee loading. Prior research has utilized musculoskeletal simulations to determine that reducing the activation of one of the calf muscles, the gastrocnemius, can have a large impact on reducing knee loading. However, this has not been tested in individuals with knee osteoarthritis. In this study, participants will be trained to alter the activation of their gastrocnemius muscle, by receiving haptic feedback after each step. The feedback will indicate how the participant changed their muscle activation relative to baseline. Some participants will train on a treadmill in the laboratory for up to two sessions, with 30 minutes of walking with feedback in each session. If a participant can learn to adjust their muscle activation in the first training session, they will be able to complete the second training session. Other participants will train outside the laboratory for one session with 30 minutes of walking with feedback to investigate changes in knee loading while using the new walking strategy during over-ground walking. The movement data collected during the training sessions will be used as inputs to computer simulations of the musculoskeletal system to determine if walking with the new muscle activation strategy reduces knee loading.

The goal of this clinical trial is to learn if compressive cryotherapy can reduce postoperative opioid consumption in patients undergoing primary total knee arthroplasty. It will also evaluate whether compressive cryotherapy improves postoperative recovery compared with standard care using conventional ice application. The main questions it aims to answer are: Does compressive cryotherapy reduce the total consumption of opioids during the first 7 days after total knee arthroplasty? Does compressive cryotherapy reduce postoperative pain and improve early recovery compared with standard cryotherapy? Researchers will compare compressive cryotherapy using the Game Ready® device with standard care using traditional ice packs to determine whether the intervention reduces opioid consumption and improves postoperative outcomes. Participants will: Be randomly assigned to receive compressive cryotherapy or standard cryotherapy with ice packs after surgery. Apply the assigned treatment four times per day during the first 7 postoperative days. Record daily pain levels using a visual analog scale (VAS) and document opioid consumption in a pain diary. Attend a follow-up visit on postoperative day 7 for evaluation of knee swelling, hematoma size, and recovery using the QoR-15 questionnaire.