Knee arthroplasty compared with joint distraction for osteoarthritis: a phase III randomized controlled trial

Aims

Knee joint distraction (KJD) has been proposed as a joint-preserving alternative to arthroplasty. The objective of this study was to evaluate the clinical and cost-effectiveness of KJD compared to arthroplasty for knee osteoarthritis.

Methods

This phase III multicentre, pragmatic, randomized controlled non-inferiority trial recruited adults aged ≤ 65 years with symptomatic osteoarthritis refractory to non-surgical treatment and suitable for knee arthroplasty. Patients were randomized to static, linear, KJD of 5 mm, produced with an external fixator construct for six-week duration, or total knee arthroplasty. The primary outcome measure was the Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcomes Score (KOOS) pain subscale 12 months post-surgery. The trial was terminated early due to failure to recruit following cessation of elective orthopaedic surgery during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Results

A total of 24 participants were randomized with baseline characteristics balanced between groups. Improved median KOOS pain scores at 12 months postoperatively were observed in both treatment groups. The median KOOS pain score in the KJD group improved from 38.9 (IQR 30.6 to 41.7) at baseline to 55.6 (IQR 41.7 to 94.4) at 12 months, while corresponding scores in the arthroplasty group improved from 30.6 (IQR 11.1 to 36.1) to 75.0 (IQR 66.7 to 88.9). Similar improvements following KJD were seen across other KOOS subdomains and pain VAS, range of motion, or timed up-and-go test. The small sample size does not provide sufficient information to make meaningful comparisons between treatment groups. Pin site infection was seen in two patients, and a fracture through a pin site after frame removal following trauma in one patient.

Conclusion

KJD appears to be associated with improved pain and function compared to baseline. The clinical and cost-effectiveness of KJD compared to arthroplasty remains uncertain.

Cite this article: Bone Jt Open 2025;6(8):886–893.