Global

‡ In these countries please contact our distributor

Evidence in Focus

JOURNEY II Total Knee System

Backed by clinical evidence

The body of evidence for the JOURNEY II Total Knee System is updated regularly. Select one of the studies below for full details, or visit here for additional resources.

 High mid-term survivorship rates and significant improvements in patient outcomes with JOURNEY II TKA1-4.


 Favorable mid-term revision rates compared with cemented posterior stabilised (PS) implants, and approximately 1% major revision at 6 years with JOURNEY II BCS5.

 Comparable levels of satisfaction and activity to total hip arthroplasty in short-term follow-up, with substantial improvements in pain and joint function with JOURNEY II BCS6

Key evidence highlights

 Significantly improved flexion and patient-reported outcomes compared with posterior stabilized TKA, with 23° more flexion at 1-year follow-up with JOURNEY II BCS7

 Significantly reduced total hospital cost, lower likelihood of 30-day readmission and significantly reduced hospital stays with JOURNEY II BCS, compared to other TKA systems8.

 JOURNEY II BCS is designed to facilitate near-normal kinematics, positively impacting patient satisfaction.

Further evidence

 View the full compendium of all JOURNEY II Total Knee System evidence, including implant survivorship, function, recovery and patient satisfaction9-15

 JOURNEY II CR demonstrates significantly improved functional outcomes, compared to conventional cruciate-retaining TKA16.


 JOURNEY II BCS design results in reduced rates of revision and reoperation, compared to JOURNEY I BCS17. 

Related evidence collections 

NAVIO◊ Handheld Robotics

OXINIUM

PICO Single Use Negative Pressure Wound Therapy

 

References:
1)        Harris A, O’Grady C, Sensiba PR, et al. Second-generation guided motion total knee arthroplasty (TKA): Results from the international multicenter study of 2,059 primary TKAs with up to 6 years follow-up. Abstract number 2719 presented as a poster at: EFORT; June 5-7, 2019; Lisbon, Portugal.
2)      Harris A, Luo TD, Lang JE, et al. Guided motion total knee arthroplasty system: five-year outcomes of the prospective multicentre US study. Presentation number 2761 presented at: EFORT; June 5-7, 2019; Lisbon, Portugal.
3)      Harris A, O’Grady C, Sensiba PR, et al. Guided motion total knee arthroplasty (TKA) system in younger patients has a lower revision rate than registry controls: results from the international mulitcenter study with up to 6 years follow-up. Abstract number 2706 presented as a poster at: EFORT; June 5-7, 2019; Lisbon, Portugal.
4)      Harris A, O’Grady C, Sensiba PR, et al. Guided motion total knee arthroplasty (TKA) in patients with BMI of 40kg/m2 or more: results from the international multicentre study of 2,059 primary TKAs with up to 6 years follow-up. Abstract number 2615 presented as a poster at: EFORT; June 5-7, 2019; Lisbon, Portugal.
5)      Harris AI, O’Grady C, Sensiba PR, et al. Performance of second-generation guided motion total knee arthroplasty system. Results from the international multicenter study of over 2,000 primary total knee arthroplasties with up to 6 years follow-up. Presented at: American Association of Hip and Knee Surgeons (AAHKS) 2018 Annual Meeting; November 1–4, 2018; Dallas, Texas, USA.
6)      Snyder MA, Sympson A, Gregg J, Levit A. A comparison of patient reported outcomes between total knee arthroplasty patients receiving the JOURNEY II bi-cruciate stabilizing knee system and total hip arthroplasty patients. Orthop Trauma Prosth. 2018; http://doi.org/10.15674.0030-5987201835. Available at: Orthopaedics, Traumatology and Prosthetics.
7)       Nodzo, SR; Carroll KM, Mayman DJ. The Bicruciate Substituting Knee Design and Initial Experience. Tech Orthop. 2018;33:37-41.
8)      Mayman DJ, Patel AR, Carroll KM. Hospital Related Clinical and Economic Outcomes of a Bicruciate Knee System in Total Knee Arthroplasty Patients. Poster presented at: ISPOR Symposium; May 19-23, 2018; Baltimore, Maryland, USA.
9)      Noble PC, Gordon MJ, Weiss JM, Reddix RN, Conditt MA, Mathis KB. Does total knee replacement restore normal knee function? Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2005;431:157-165.
10)   Verstaete MA, Van Onsem S, Zambianchi F, et al. Multi-centre evaluation of knee kinematics during different activities for anatomic total knee design. Poster presented at: 2nd World Arthroplasty Congress; 19-21 April, 2018; Rome, Italy.
11)     Grieco TF, Sharma A, Dessinger GM, Cates HE, Komistek RD. In vivo kinematic comparison of a bicruciate stabilized total knee arthroplasty and the normal knee using fluoroscopy. J Arthroplasty. 2018;33:565-571.
12)   Sharma A, Dessinger G, Cates H, Komistesk R. In vivo kinematic comparison for subjects having a bi-cruciate substituting TKA vs the normal knee. Poster presented at: 2nd World Arthroplasty Congress; 19-21 April, 2018; Rome, Italy.
13)   Kosse NM, Heesterbeek PJC, Defoort KC, Wymenga AB, van Hellemondt GG. Minor adaptations in implant design bicruciate-substituted total knee system improve maximal flexion. Poster presented at: 2nd World Arthroplasty Congress; 19-21 April, 2018; Rome, Italy.
14)   Verstraete MA, Van Onsem S, Van Eenoo W, Van der Straeten C, Catani F, Victor J. Posterior stabilized total knee kinematics: how anatomic do we get today? –an in vivo comparative study considering three different implants. Poster presented at: 2nd World Arthroplasty Congress; 19-21 April, 2018; Rome, Italy.
15)   Van Onsem S, Verstraete M, Van Eenoo W, Van der Straeten C, Victor J. Total knee kinematics do determine patient reported outcomes. Poster presented at: 2nd World Arthroplasty Congress; 19-21 April, 2018; Rome, Italy. Arthroplasty Congress. Rome, Italy 19-21 April 2018.
16) Lutes W, Fitch D. Comparison of functional outcomes following total knee arthroplasty with a conventional implant design or one designed to mimic natural knee kinematics. Presented at: 39th SICOT Orthopaedic World Congress; October 10-13, 2018; Montréal, Canada.
17)  Christen B, Kopjar B. Second-generation bi-cruciate stabilized total knee system has a lower reoperation and revision rate than its predecessor. ArchOrthop Trauma Surg. 2018;138:1591-1599. Available at: Archives of Orthopaedic and Trauma Surgery.