A 15-year evaluation of two total knee arthroplasty designs

Aims: To compare 15-year patient-reported outcomes measure (PROMs), pain characteristics, implant survivorship, and radiological findings between two total knee arthroplasty (TKA) systems to determine whether modern implant design influenced outcomes. Methods: A minimum 15-year follow-up of a randomised controlled trial was undertaken of patients undergoing primary TKA with either the Kinemax or Triathlon implant. We compared 15-year survivorship, mortality, patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs: Oxford Knee Score (OKS), Forgotten Joint Score (FJS), EuroQol five-dimension questionnaire (EQ-5D), and EQ visual analogue scale (VAS)), pain and location, and radiological assessments between groups. Results: There were nine revisions during the follow-up period (six aseptic and three septic), and there was no difference between the groups (p = 0.721, log-rank). A total of 108 deaths occurred, corresponding to 50.7% (95% CI 44.1 to 57.3) patient mortality at 15 years, with no difference between groups (p = 0.603, log-rank). Overall, 61 patients completed functional assessment at 15 years (mean age 80 years (SD 8.5); 41 female (67%)). There were no statistical (p ≥ 0.170) or clinically meaningful differences between groups in OKS, FJS, EQ-5D, EQ VAS, or satisfaction. Longitudinal analysis demonstrated no between-group differences in postoperative OKS or EQ-5D. However, both declined significantly over the study period (p < 0.001), but remained clinically meaningfully better than those observed preoperatively. Pain VAS scores were comparable, although anterior knee pain was more frequent in the Kinemax group (OR 3.2, p = 0.037). Radiological assessment showed no loosening. Tibial zone 1 radiolucent lines (OR 12.1, 95% CI 2.6 to 57.6, p < 0.001) and severe patellofemoral osteoarthritis (OR 5.1, 95% CI 1.4 to 18.4, p = 0.010) were more prevalent in the Kinemax group. Conclusion: Both implants were associated with comparable PROMs, and despite deterioration with increasing follow-up, they remained superior to preoperative scores. The Kinemax group demonstrated higher rates of anterior knee pain, though this difference did not result in clinically meaningful outcome disparities.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Bone & Joint Open
Published
2026-10-14
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1302/2633-1462.710.bjo-2026-0115.r1
Primary Topic
Total Knee Arthroplasty Outcomes
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

A 15-year evaluation of two total knee arthroplasty designs

Caroline Scott, Paul Gaston, Mr Nick Clement, Thomas R. Williamson et al.
Bone & Joint Open
Total Knee Arthroplasty Outcomes
article

A 15-year evaluation of two total knee arthroplasty designs

Caroline Scott, Paul Gaston, Mr Nick Clement, Thomas R. Williamson, Gillian L. Leitch
article en

Abstract

Aims: To compare 15-year patient-reported outcomes measure (PROMs), pain characteristics, implant survivorship, and radiological findings between two total knee arthroplasty (TKA) systems to determine whether modern implant design influenced outcomes. Methods: A minimum 15-year follow-up of a randomised controlled trial was undertaken of patients undergoing primary TKA with either the Kinemax or Triathlon implant. We compared 15-year survivorship, mortality, patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs: Oxford Knee Score (OKS), Forgotten Joint Score (FJS), EuroQol five-dimension questionnaire (EQ-5D), and EQ visual analogue scale (VAS)), pain and location, and radiological assessments between groups. Results: There were nine revisions during the follow-up period (six aseptic and three septic), and there was no difference between the groups (p = 0.721, log-rank). A total of 108 deaths occurred, corresponding to 50.7% (95% CI 44.1 to 57.3) patient mortality at 15 years, with no difference between groups (p = 0.603, log-rank). Overall, 61 patients completed functional assessment at 15 years (mean age 80 years (SD 8.5); 41 female (67%)). There were no statistical (p ≥ 0.170) or clinically meaningful differences between groups in OKS, FJS, EQ-5D, EQ VAS, or satisfaction. Longitudinal analysis demonstrated no between-group differences in postoperative OKS or EQ-5D. However, both declined significantly over the study period (p < 0.001), but remained clinically meaningfully better than those observed preoperatively. Pain VAS scores were comparable, although anterior knee pain was more frequent in the Kinemax group (OR 3.2, p = 0.037). Radiological assessment showed no loosening. Tibial zone 1 radiolucent lines (OR 12.1, 95% CI 2.6 to 57.6, p < 0.001) and severe patellofemoral osteoarthritis (OR 5.1, 95% CI 1.4 to 18.4, p = 0.010) were more prevalent in the Kinemax group. Conclusion: Both implants were associated with comparable PROMs, and despite deterioration with increasing follow-up, they remained superior to preoperative scores. The Kinemax group demonstrated higher rates of anterior knee pain, though this difference did not result in clinically meaningful outcome disparities.

Bone & Joint OpenVol. 7(10)
Edinburgh Royal Infirmary (GB), Imperial College London (GB), University of Edinburgh (GB)
Stryker
Good health and well-being
Openalex Percentile: Top 11%
Total Knee Arthroplasty Outcomes
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.