Skip to main content
. 2022 Nov 30;143(3):1549–1569. doi: 10.1007/s00402-022-04683-z

Table 5.

Overview of the literature: outcomes of stemmed RTKA implants in primary TKA

Research group Year Cases (N) Stem fixation Implant type Stem design FU (years) Survival Asept. Loosening (AL) PJI Others
Engelbrecht et al. 1981 1074 TKA Cemented ENDO Model (LINK) Co  > 10 N/A 6% 2% N/A
Rand et al. 1987 38 (15 TKA, 23 RTKA) Cemented Kinematic RH (Howmedica) Co 4–5 10y-survival 60% 13% (RLL 25% f, 50% t) 16% N/A
Shaw et al. 1989 38 (20 TKA, 18 RTKA) Cemented Kinematic RH (Howmedica) Co 4 N/A

7% TKA, 20% RTKA

(RLL 45% TKA, 52% RTKA)

5% (TKA), 11% (RTKA) N/A
Blauth and Hassenpflug 1990 497 TKA Cemented Blauth (Aesculap) Co 4 10y-survival 89% 1.2% 3% N/A
Böhm and Holy 1998 422 TKA Cemented Blauth (Aesculap) Co 20 Survival 93.6% 0.7% 3.8% N/A
Argenson and Aubaniac 2000 194 TKA Cemented ENDO Model (LINK) Co 6–7 Survival > 90% N/A 2.5% 6% Compli
Zinck & Sellckau 2000 2682 TKA Cemented ENDO Model (LINK) Co 5–6 Survival > 95% 1% 1.6% 11.4% Compli
Springer et al. 2001 69 (12 TKA, 57 RTKA) Cemented Kinematic RH (Howmedica) Co 6 N/A N/A N/A 32% Compli
Himanen et al. 2002 25 (4 TKA, 21 RTKA) Cemented AGC DA monobloc (Biomet UK) Co 2.3 N/A 0% 4% 20% Compli
Petrou et al. 2004 100 TKA Cemented ENDO Model (LINK) Co 11 15y-survival 96.1% 0% 2% N/A
Steckel et al. 2005 227 TKA Cemented Blauth (Aesculap) Co 10 10y-survival 90% 1.3% (only t) 3.5% N/A
Pour et al. 2007 44 (17 TKA, 27 RTKA)

93% Cemented

7% Cementless

70.5% Kinematic RH (Howmedica)

29.5% Finn RH (Biomed)

Co

Cy(f)

Cy-Co(t)

4.2 1y-, 5y-survival 79.6%, 68.2% 9.1% 6.8% N/A
Deehan et al. 2008 72 (15 TKA, 57 RTKA) Cemented Kinematic RH (Howmedica) Co 10 5y-survival 90% 1.4% 5.6% N/A
Bae et al. 2009

11 TKA

Charcot knees

Cemented ENDO Model (LINK) Co 12.3 10y-survival 72.7% 0% 9.1% 27.3% Compli
Guenoun et al. 2009 85 (52 TKA, 33 RTKA) Cemented ENDO Model (LINK) Co 3 3y-survival 89.4% 3.5% 10.6% 28.2% Compli
Efe et al. 2012 49 (21 TKA, 28 RTKA) Cemented ENDO Model (LINK) Co 4.7 Survival 95% TKA, 76% RTKA 0% (TKA), 7.1% (RTKA) 4.8% (TKA), 32% (RTKA) Failure: 14.3% (TKA), 53.6% (RTKA)
Yang et al. 2012 50 TKA Cemented ENDO Model (LINK) Co 15 10y-survival 87% 0% (RLL 10%) 14% 14% failure
Bistolfi et al. 2013 72 TKA Cemented ENDO Model RH (LINK) Co 14.5 1y-, 5y-, 10y-, 15y-survival 88.7%, 86%, 79.8%, 75.8% 4.1% 8.3% 25% failure
Gehrke et al. 2014 141 TKA Cemented ENDO Model (LINK) Co 13.5 Survival 90% 0.5% (f) 2% 8% failure
Hernandez-Vaquero et al. 2010 26 (5 TKA, 21 RTKA) Cemented (100% t, 54% f) Modular RH Prosthesis (Stryker) Cy-Co 3.8 N/A 0% (RLL 19%) 7.7% 11.5% ReOP
Kowalczewski et al. 2014 12 TKA Cementless Modular RH Prosthesis (Stryker) Cy-Co 10–12 10y-survival 100% 0% (RLL 25% t) 0% 0% failures
Westrich et al. 2000 24 (9 TKA, 15 RTKA) Cemented Finn RH (Biomet)

Cy(f)

Cy-Co(t)

2–3 survival 100% 0% N/A N/A
Barrack et al. 2001 23 (2 TKA, 21 RTKA) Cementless S-ROM Noiles (DePuy) Cy 4.8 N/A 0% N/A N/A
Kowalczewski et al. 2004 28 (15 TKA, 13 RTKA) N/A AGC DA (Biomet UK) Cy 0.5 N/A 1% 0% 2 Compli
Springer et al. 2004 26 (4 TKA, 22 RKTA) Cemented Modular Segmental Kinematic RH (Howmedica) Cy 5 10y-survival < 70% 15.4% (RLL 42.3%) 19.2% 31% Compli, 27% ReOP
Brinsuk 2009 155 (142 TKA, 13 RTKA) Cemented RT-PLUS Solution (Smith&Nephew) Cy (Co)* 2 0.6% 4% 13.5% Compli
Maynard et al. 2014 127 TKA Cementless NexGen LCCK (Zimmer) Cy 9.2 10y-survival 97.6% 0% 1.6% 19.7% Compli, 10.2% RTKA
Cholewinski et al. 2015 43 TKA Cementless NexGen LCCK (Zimmer) Cy 12.7 11y-survival 88.5%, aseptic 97.7% 0% 4.7% 16% Compli, 7% RTKA
Lique et al. 2015 89 TKA Cementless Optetrak CCK (Exactech) Cy 9 2y-, 8y-survival 93.8%, 90.1% 2.2% 6.7% 7.8% failure
Feng et al. 2016 48 TKA Cementless NexGen LCCK (Zimmer) Cy 6 6y-survival 97.9% 2.1% t, (RLL 8.3%) 0% N/A
Ye et al. 2016 47 (31 TKA, 16 RTKA) Cementless NexGen LCCK (Zimmer) Cy 5.5 N/A 0% (RLL 4%) 3.2% (TKA), 6.3% (RTKA) N/A
Johnson et al. 2019 21 TKA (age < 60) Cemented Sigma TC3 (DePuy) Cy (Co)* 5.5 Survival 100% 0% (RLL 52%) 0%
Panda et al. 2019

79 (20 TKA, 59 RTKA)

& cones

Cementless 67% LCCK, 33% RHK (Zimmer) Cy 6.6 Survival 95% 0% (RLL 8.9%) 2.5% 26.6% Compli, 5% ReOP
Gill et al. 2020

43 (12 TKA 31 RTKA

& sleeves)

Cementless 32.6% Sigma PS, 44.2% Sigma TC3, 23.3% S-ROM Noiles (DePuy) Cy 5.4 N/A 0% (RLL 4.6%) 2.3% 0% ReRTKA
Mancino et al. 2020 49 TKA

93.4% (short) cemented

6.4% (long) cementless

NexGen LCCK (Zimmer) Cy 9 survival 93.6% (100% for AL) 0% 4.3% N/A
Backer et al. 2012 964 TKA N/A various RH prostheses N/A 5 5y-survival 96.98% 0.3% 0.8% 2% RTKA
Martin et al. 2016 28.667 TKA N/A 427 CCK, 246 RH (DePuy, Zimmer, Stryker) N/A 10.1

10y-survival

90% (CCK) and 74.6% (RH)

20y-survival

72.8% (CCK) & 40.3% (RH)

4.4% (CCK), 6.1% (RH) 1.2% (CCK), 3.7% (RH) RTKA: 7.3% (CCK), 17.1% (RH)
Tripathi et al. 2016 100 TKA (BMI > 30) N/A CCK prostheses N/A 7 N/A 1% 1% N/A
Siqueira et al. 2017 685 (247 TKA, 315 aseptic RTKA, 123 septic RTKA) 82% Cemented various RH prostheses N/A 8.2

TKA: 10y-survival 88.5%

RKTA: 10y-survival 75.8% (asept) 54.6% (sept)

TKA: 0.8%

RTKA: 1.9%

TKA: 5.3%

RTKA: 22.8%

N/A

FU follow up, AL aseptic loosening, PJI periprosthetic joint infection, TKA total knee arthroplasty, RTKA revision total knee arthroplasty, f femoral, t tibial, N/A not available, Co conical, Cy cylindrical, Cy-Co cylindrical-conical combined designs, y years, RLL radiolucent lines, ReRTKA re-revision of TKA implants, Compli complications, ReOP re-operation