Newer versus Older Implant Systems from a Single Manufacturer and Cause-Specific Revision Risk following Primary Total Knee Arthroplasty

Abstract

Novel implant systems have design modifications that seek to improve total knee arthroplasty (TKA) survivorship. We evaluated overall and cause-specific revision risk for a newer generation implant system compared with its predecessor from the same manufacturer. We conducted a cohort study using data from the United States-based Kaiser Permanente Total Joint Replacement Registry. Adult patients who underwent primary, fully cemented, fixed-bearing TKA for osteoarthritis between 2009 and 2022 were identified. Only two implant systems from the manufacturer were included: the newer generation (n = 22,287) and the older generation (n = 37,105). Multivariable Cox regression was used to evaluate overall and cause-specific aseptic revision risk. In the adjusted analyses, no difference in risk was observed for the newer compared with older generation system in the first 4-year follow-up (hazard ratio [HR] = 0.94, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.74–1.19); however, a higher risk was observed after 4-year follow-up (HR = 2.09, 95% CI = 1.41–3.08). This higher risk was due to loosening (within 4 years: HR = 0.90, 95% CI = 0.59–1.37; after 4 years: HR = 2.88, 95% CI = 1.84–4.51); no differences were observed for other revision reasons. When considering constructs utilizing different trays of the newer generation system, the higher risk of revision for loosening was observed only when the first iteration of the tray was used (HR = 1.94, 95% CI = 1.37–2.77); no difference was observed for constructs utilizing the subsequent iterations of the tray, which underwent design changes, when compared with the older generation TKA system (HR = 0.45, 95% CI = 0.20–1.01). We found no survivorship advantage with a newer TKA design compared with a preceding design from the same manufacturer. The higher risk of revision for loosening in the newer generation constructs was limited to those utilizing the first tray iteration, which is now discontinued by the manufacturer. The higher revision risk was not observed with subsequent iterations of the newer generation construct relative to the older generation.

Level of Evidence Level III.

Keywords

total knee arthroplasty - implant generation - revision - aseptic loosening - registry

Publication History

Received: 10 March 2025

Accepted: 23 July 2025

Accepted Manuscript online:
24 July 2025

Article published online:
07 August 2025

• References

• 1 Bourne RB, Chesworth BM, Davis AM, Mahomed NN, Charron KD. Patient satisfaction after total knee arthroplasty: who is satisfied and who is not?. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2010; 468 (01) 57-63
• 2 Lewis PL, Graves SE, de Steiger RN. et al. Does knee prosthesis survivorship improve when implant designs change? Findings from the Australian Orthopaedic Association National Joint Replacement Registry. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2020; 478 (06) 1156-1172
• 3 Clayton RA, Amin AK, Gaston MS, Brenkel IJ. Five-year results of the Sigma total knee arthroplasty. Knee 2006; 13 (05) 359-364
• 4 Ranawat CS, White PB, West S, Ranawat AS. Clinical and radiographic results of Attune and PFC Sigma knee designs at 2-year follow-up: a prospective matched-pair analysis. J Arthroplasty 2017; 32 (02) 431-436
• 5 Ranawat AS, Ranawat CS, Slamin JE, Dennis DA. Patellar crepitation in the PFC sigma total knee system. Orthopedics 2006; 29 (09) S68-S70
• 6 Fukunaga K, Kobayashi A, Minoda Y, Iwaki H, Hashimoto Y, Takaoka K. The incidence of the patellar clunk syndrome in a recently designed mobile-bearing posteriorly stabilised total knee replacement. J Bone Joint Surg Br 2009; 91 (04) 463-468
• 7 Frye BM, Floyd MW, Pham DC, Feldman JJ, Hamlin BR. Effect of femoral component design on patellofemoral crepitance and patella clunk syndrome after posterior-stabilized total knee arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty 2012; 27 (06) 1166-1170
• 8 Choi WC, Ryu KJ, Lee S, Seong SC, Lee MC. Painful patellar clunk or crepitation of contemporary knee prostheses. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2013; 471 (05) 1512-1522
• 9 Takagi H, Asai S, Sato A, Maekawa M, Kawashima H, Kanzaki K. Case series report of navigation-based in vivo knee kinematics in total knee arthroplasty with a gradually reducing femoral radius design. Ann Med Surg (Lond) 2017; 17: 33-37
• 10 DePuy Synthes. ATTUNE Knee System. Accessed January 19, 2024 at: https://www.jnjmedtech.com/en-US/product/attune-knee-system
• 11 Davis AC, Voelkel JL, Remmers CL, Adams JL, McGlynn EA. Comparing Kaiser Permanente members to the general population: implications for generalizability of research. Perm J 2023; 27 (02) 87-98
• 12 Paxton EW, Inacio MC, Khatod M, Yue EJ, Namba RS. Kaiser Permanente National Total Joint Replacement Registry: aligning operations with information technology. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2010; 468 (10) 2646-2663
• 13 Paxton EW, Namba RS, Maletis GB. et al. A prospective study of 80,000 total joint and 5000 anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction procedures in a community-based registry in the United States. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2010; 92 (Suppl. 02) 117-132
• 14 Paxton EW, Kiley ML, Love R, Barber TC, Funahashi TT, Inacio MC. Kaiser Permanente implant registries benefit patient safety, quality improvement, cost-effectiveness. Jt Comm J Qual Patient Saf 2013; 39 (06) 246-252
• 15 Lewis PL, Robertsson O, Graves SE, Paxton EW, Prentice HA, W-Dahl A. Variation and trends in reasons for knee replacement revision: a multi-registry study of revision burden. Acta Orthop 2021; 92 (02) 182-188
• 16 Prodromidis AD, Chloros GD, Thivaios GC. et al. High rate of radiolucent lines following the cemented original design of the Attune total knee arthroplasty. Bone Joint J 2023; 105-B [phone]
• 17 Sadoghi P, Liebensteiner M, Agreiter M, Leithner A, Böhler N, Labek G. Revision surgery after total joint arthroplasty: a complication-based analysis using worldwide arthroplasty registers. J Arthroplasty 2013; 28 (08) 1329-1332
• 18 Sharkey PF, Lichstein PM, Shen C, Tokarski AT, Parvizi J. Why are total knee arthroplasties failing today–has anything changed after 10 years?. J Arthroplasty 2014; 29 (09) 1774-1778
• 19 Thiele K, Perka C, Matziolis G, Mayr HO, Sostheim M, Hube R. Current failure mechanisms after knee arthroplasty have changed: polyethylene wear is less common in revision surgery. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2015; 97 (09) 715-720
• 20 Abdel MP, Bonadurer III GF, Jennings MT, Hanssen AD. Increased aseptic tibial failures in patients with a BMI ≥35 and well-aligned total knee arthroplasties. J Arthroplasty 2015; 30 (12) 2181-2184
• 21 Bonutti PM, Khlopas A, Chughtai M. et al. Unusually high rate of early failure of tibial component in Attune total knee arthroplasty system at implant-cement interface. J Knee Surg 2017; 30 (05) 435-439
• 22 Lachiewicz PF, Steele JR, Wellman SS. Unexpected high rate of revision of a modern cemented fixed bearing modular posterior-stabilized knee arthroplasty. Bone Joint J 2021; 103-B (6, Supple A): 137-144
• 23 Murphy JD, Braunlich PR, Judson Iv WR, Harker JN, Baumann PA. Early aseptic failure of the tibial component-cement interface in ATTUNE total knee arthroplasty: a report of three cases. Cureus 2021; 13 (12) e20582
• 24 Giaretta S, Berti M, Micheloni GM, Ceccato A, Marangoni F, Momoli A. Early experience with the ATTUNE total knee replacement system. Acta Biomed 2019; 90 (12-S, 12-s): 98-103
• 25 Torino D, Damsgaard C, Kolessar DJ. et al. Tibial baseplate-cement interface debonding in the ATTUNE total knee arthroplasty system. Arthroplast Today 2022; 17: 165-171
• 26 van Otten TJM, van Loon CJM. Early aseptic loosening of the tibial component at the cement-implant interface in total knee arthroplasty: a narrative overview of potentially associated factors. Acta Orthop Belg 2022; 88 (01) 103-111
• 27 Deen JT, Clay TB, Iams DA, Horodyski M, Parvataneni HK. Proximal tibial resorption in a modern total knee prosthesis. Arthroplast Today 2017; 4 (02) 244-248
• 28 Bhalekar RM, Nargol ME, Shyam N. et al. Tibial tray debonding from the cement mantle is associated with deformation of the backside of polyethylene tibial inserts. Bone Joint J 2021; 103-B (12) 1791-1801
• 29 Robinson T, King SW, Pilling RWD. et al. Attune total knee arthroplasty: is there evidence of early tibial component de-bonding? A prospective cohort study with a minimum two year follow-up. J Arthrosc Jt Surg 2021; 8 (02) 139-147
• 30 Indelli PF, Pipino G, Johnson P, Graceffa A, Marcucci M. Posterior-stabilized total knee arthroplasty: a matched pair analysis of a classic and its evolutional design. Arthroplast Today 2016; 2 (04) 193-198
• 31 Willburger RE, Oberberg S. Early and mid-term results with the ATTUNE total knee replacement system compared to PFC Sigma: a prospective comparative study. J Orthop Surg Res 2022; 17 (01) 509
• 32 Staats K, Wannmacher T, Weihs V, Koller U, Kubista B, Windhager R. Modern cemented total knee arthroplasty design shows a higher incidence of radiolucent lines compared to its predecessor. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 2019; 27 (04) 1148-1155
• 33 Pijls BG, Valstar ER, Nouta KA. et al. Early migration of tibial components is associated with late revision: a systematic review and meta-analysis of 21,000 knee arthroplasties. Acta Orthop 2012; 83 (06) 614-624
• 34 Turgeon TR, Gascoyne TC, Laende EK, Dunbar MJ, Bohm ER, Richardson CG. The assessment of the stability of the tibial component of a novel knee arthroplasty system using radiostereometric analysis. Bone Joint J 2018; 100-B (12) 1579-1584
• 35 Yüksel Y, Koster LA, Kaptein BL, Nelissen RGHH, den Hollander P. No difference in component migration at five years between the cemented cruciate-retaining ATTUNE and PFC-Sigma knee prosthesis: an update of a randomized clinical radiostereometry trial. Bone Joint J 2023; 105-B (11) 1168-1176
• 36 Kaptein BL, den Hollander P, Thomassen B, Fiocco M, Nelissen RGHH. A randomized controlled trial comparing tibial migration of the ATTUNE cemented cruciate-retaining knee prosthesis with the PFC-sigma design. Bone Joint J 2020; 102-B [phone]
• 37 Cerquiglini A, Henckel J, Hothi H. et al. Analysis of the Attune tibial tray backside: a comparative retrieval study. Bone Joint Res 2019; 8 (03) 136-145
• 38 Pomeroy D, Swank M, Irving J, Croker S, Fawley D, Spitzer A. Two-year survivorship and clinical outcomes of total knee arthroplasty with a new tibial design from a multi-center registry. Presented at: 23rd EFORT Annual Congress; 2022 ; Lisbon, Portugal. Accessed March 20, 2024 at: https://efortnet.conference2web.com/#!resources/two-year-survivorship-and-clinical-outcomes-of-total-knee-arthroplasty-with-a-new-tibial-design-from-a-multi-center-registry-e2d26ae6-550f-4d60-a44a-0adefe008e77
• 39 Kelly BC, Owen JR, Shah SC, Johnson AJ, Golladay GJ, Kates SL. A biomechanical comparison of the effect of baseplate design and bone marrow fat infiltration on tibial baseplate pullout strength. J Arthroplasty 2021; 36 (01) 356-361
• 40 Jaeger S, Eissler M, Schwarze M, Schonhoff M, Kretzer JP, Bitsch RG. Cement debonding behaviors of the various tibial components of the ATTUNE knee system and its predecessors: is a cement-in-cement revision an alternative?. Knee 2021; 33: 185-192
• 41 Song SJ, Park CH, Liang H, Kang SG, Park JJ, Bae DK. Comparison of clinical results and injury risk of posterior tibial cortex between Attune and press fit condylar sigma knee systems. J Arthroplasty 2018; 33 (02) 391-397
• 42 Carey BW, Harty J. A comparison of clinical- and patient-reported outcomes of the cemented ATTUNE and PFC sigma fixed bearing cruciate sacrificing knee systems in patients who underwent total knee replacement with both prostheses in opposite knees. J Orthop Surg Res 2018; 13 (01) 54
• 43 Martin JR, Jennings JM, Watters TS, Levy DL, McNabb DC, Dennis DA. Femoral implant design modification decreases the incidence of patellar crepitus in total knee arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty 2017; 32 (04) 1310-1313
• 44 Toomey SD, Daccach JA, Shah JC, Himden SE, Lesko JP, Hamilton WG. Comparative incidence of patellofemoral complications between 2 total knee arthroplasty systems in a multicenter, prospective clinical study. J Arthroplasty 2017; 32 (9S, 9s): S187-S192
• 45 Mathis DT, Schmidli J, Amsler F. et al. Comparative retrieval analysis of a novel anatomic tibial tray backside: alterations in tibial component design and surface coating can increase cement adhesions and surface roughness. BMC Musculoskelet Disord 2022; 23 (01) 474
• 46 Hazelwood KJ, O'Rourke M, Stamos VP, McMillan RD, Beigler D, Robb III WJ. Case series report: early cement-implant interface fixation failure in total knee replacement. Knee 2015; 22 (05) 424-428
• 47 Klasan A, Rainbird S, Peng Y. et al. No difference in revision rate between low viscosity and high viscosity cement used in primary total knee arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty 2022; 37 (10) 2025-2034
• 48 Kopinski JE, Aggarwal A, Nunley RM, Barrack RL, Nam D. Failure at the tibial cement-implant interface with the use of high-viscosity cement in total knee arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty 2016; 31 (11) 2579-2582
• 49 Wyatt RWB, Chang RN, Royse KE, Paxton EW, Namba RS, Prentice HA. The association between cement viscosity and revision risk after primary total knee arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty 2021; 36 (06) 1987-1994