search  
 


Home

Who are we?

Why
register?


Signup for
registration


Online registration

Log in to register
your trial


Search a trial

NRT en CCMO

Contact

NEDERLANDS





MetaRegister
van CCT (UK)


ISRCTN-Register
van CCT (UK)


Computer Assisted Surgery versus conventional arthroscopic Anterior Cruciate Ligament reconstruction – a prospective randomised clinical trial.


- candidate number2405
- NTR NumberNTR870
- ISRCTNISRCTN40231111
- Date ISRCTN created8-feb-2007
- date ISRCTN requested7-feb-2007
- Date Registered NTR15-jan-2007
- Secondary IDsN/A 
- Public TitleComputer Assisted Surgery versus conventional arthroscopic Anterior Cruciate Ligament reconstruction – a prospective randomised clinical trial.
- Scientific TitleComputer Assisted Surgery versus conventional arthroscopic Anterior Cruciate Ligament reconstruction – a prospective randomised clinical trial.
- ACRONYMCAS versus conventional ACL reconstruction
- hypothesisAn ACL reconstruction can take place more accurate with Computer Assisted Surgery than a conventional arthroscopic reconstruction with regard to tunnel position
- Healt Condition(s) or Problem(s) studiedAnterior cruciate ligament, Rupture
- Inclusion criteria1. All patients with an ACL rupture who are indicated for a reconstruction; 2. Age >18 yrs.
- Exclusion criteria1. Patients who are unable to understand Dutch written language; 2. Patients who are unable to follow the regular postoperative controls.
- mec approval receivedyes
- multicenter trialno
- randomisedyes
- masking/blindingSingle
- controlActive
- groupParallel
- Type-
- Studytypeintervention
- planned startdate 1-dec-2006
- planned closingdate1-dec-2010
- Target number of participants90
- InterventionsArthroscopic ACL reconstruction, randomised in 45 conventional (usual care), and 45 CAS.
- Primary outcomePlanned tunnel position versus actual achieved tunnel position of the ACL transplant (by CT)
- Secondary outcome1. difference in change in IKDC 2. difference in change in KOOS 3. difference in change in knee pain (VAS for pain) 4. difference in change in knee complaints (Lysholm score) 5. difference in change in sport activity (Tegner score) 6. difference in change in objective instability of the knee (KT1000) 7. difference in change in objective muscle strenght (Biodex) 8. difference satisfaction of the treatment
- Timepoints
- Trial web siteN/A
- statusopen: patient inclusion
- CONTACT FOR PUBLIC QUERIES D.E. Meuffels
- CONTACT for SCIENTIFIC QUERIES M.M. Favejee
- Sponsor/Initiator Erasmus Medical Center, Department of Orthopaedics
- Funding
(Source(s) of Monetary or Material Support)
Erasmus Medical Center, Department of Orthopaedics
- PublicationsN/A
- Brief summaryThe most common reason for failure after an ACL reconstruction is a malposition of the new ACL transplant due to a malposition of the tibial tunnel and/ or femoral tunnel. Since one year in the Erasmus MC Computer-assisted surgery (CAS) has become established for total knee replacement. There are less malpositions following CAS than after implantation by the conventional technique. Nowadays it’s possible to use CAS for ACL reconstruction. The main aim of this study is to compare the results of the ACL reconstruction following CAS with a conventional ACL reconstruction.
- Main changes (audit trail)
- RECORD15-jan-2007 - 9-feb-2007


  • Indien u gegevens wilt toevoegen of veranderen, kunt u een mail sturen naar nederlands@trialregister.nl