Skip to main content
. 2011 Jul 15;20(3):559–564. doi: 10.1007/s00167-011-1605-y

Table 1.

Overview of the prostheses used, congruency of the insert and number of knees and patient characteristics (mean and standard deviation)

Prosthesis Design parameters Number of knees Follow-up (months) Male/female Age (years) BMI (kg/m2) Pre-operative Post-operative
Function score Knee score Function score Knee score
Duracona Multi-radius 10 21 (8.9) 3/7 68 (10.9) 29 (3.7) x x 88 (13) 95 (3)
Fixed-bearing
Cruciate retaining
Triathlon FBa Single-radius 11 13 (1.0) 5/6 66 (9.1) 30 (6.2) 52 (18) 43 (13) 73 (24) 92 (4)
Fixed-bearing
Posterior-stabilized
Triathlon MBa Single-radius 9 12 (2.5) 2/7 63 (9.6) 31 (7.5) 48 (13) 49 (21) 71 (26) 90 (11)
Mobile-bearing
Posterior-stabilized
PFC-Sigmab Multi-radius 8 5 (1.0) 4/4 67 (7.6) 31 (5.1) x x x x
Fixed-bearing
Posterior-stabilized
NexGenc Multi-radius 7 43 (7.7) 1/6 67 (8.2) 30 (3.1) 43 (16) 44 (24) 74 (30) 84 (18)
Mobile-bearing
Posterior-stabilized
ROCCd Multi-radius 7 25 (0.8) 3/4 63 (10.9) 29 (5.6) 50 (26) 47 (12) 79 (22) 86 (11)
Mobile-bearing
Cruciate sacrificing

Missing data are indicated with an ‘x’

aStryker, Kalamazoo, MI, USA

bDePuy Orthopaedics Inc., Warsaw, In, USA

cZimmer Inc., Warsaw, In, USA

dBiomet, Europe BV, Dordrecht, The Netherlands