Triathlon

Knee implants should work in harmony with the functional arcs, axes and the shape of the natural knee. By mimicking the anatomical shapes and axes of the normal knee, Stryker knee implants and progressive technologies respect the soft tissue envelope of the patient and work with the body – rather than simply within it.

Overview

Overview

Stryker’s Triathlon is a total knee system that has over a decade of proven performance in both Australia and New Zealand, recording one of the highest published survivorship rates of all knee prostheses in the market at 96.6%27 and 97.4%22 respectively after ten years.

Stryker’s knee philosophy is focused around ‘Soft Tissue Guided Motion’ where the implant respects the soft tissue envelope of the patient and works with the body rather than simply within it. This results in patients being able to experience a high flexion and high functioning knee, and quicker post-surgery recovery 2.

Stryker’s ‘Soft Tissue Guided Motion’ philosophy is able to be realised through five modern design features found in the Triathlon knee system:

  • Single radius
  • Rotary arc
  • Shortened and flared posterior condyles
  • Anatomic patellofemoral track
  • Reduced extension radius
Proven Design

Proven Design

Helping over 2 million patients to get around3. Triathlon’s distinction as a modern knee boasting multiple international design patents and a wealth of clinical support, offers surgeons modern advancements in motion along with confidence in implant selection4. That is why Triathlon design has resolutely remained unchanged for over ten years since launch.

Single Radius

Single Radius

Design backed by scientific evidence.

  • Modern research revealed that the posterior condyles are circular5,6
  • Single radius geometry is apparent in over 1,000 consecutive femurs in the SOMA database7
  • A cadaver study demonstrated that the active flexion radius range is 10° to 110° 5

 

Rotary Arc

Rotary Arc

Designed to enable soft tissue guided motion

  • Designed to reduce rotational constraint compared to other systems8,9
  • Designed to accommodate up to 20° internal and external rotation8,10,11
  • There are no design features in Triathlon that promote a particular pivot location, giving the patient’s soft tissues the ability to pivot as needed4,12

 

Shortened & Flared Posterior Condyles

Shortened & Flared Posterior Condyles

Designed to accommodate up to 150° deep flexion10

  • Shortened condyles facilitate the relaxation of the soft tissues13 and mitigate the need for additional tibial slope resection
  • Flared condyles ensure patch contact with rotation in deep flexion13,14

 

Reduced Extension Radius

Reduced Extension Radius

Designed to enable full extension without procedural compromise9,15

  • Prevents impingement as the knee moves into the extension arc9
  • Accommodates +/- 10 degrees of rotation in hyperextension and extension, allowing the “screw home” mechanism9

 

Anatomic Patellofemoral Groove

Anatomic Patellofemoral Groove

Designed to mimic the native knee16

  • Designed with a deepened trochlear groove to help relax the extensor mechanism, enable deep flexion, and reduce contact stresses exerted across the patella17
  • Incorporates the same patellofemoral design as Duracon, which demonstrated <1% patellofemoral complication rates in multiple studies18,19,20

 

Proven Results

Proven Results

Global registry data shows that the unchanged design of the Triathlon Knee has one of the lowest revision rates in the industry10,21-26.

Hip and Knee Arthroplasty Annual Report 2016

Triathlon CR is the most used femoral prostheses in primary TKR (17.1%) in all categories - cemented, cementless and hybrid (Table KT2).

Triathlon Cumulative Percent Revision (extracted from Table KT9,10,11)27:

Category

Femoral Component

Tibial Component

Cumulative Percent Revision

Cemented

Triathlon CR

Triathlon

3.8% at 10 years

Cemented

Triathlon PS

Triathlon

4.6% at 7 years

Cementless

Triathlon CR

Triathlon

3.3% at 7 years

Cementless

Triathlon PS

Triathlon

4.9% at 7 years

Hybrid

Triathlon CR

Triathlon

2.6% at 7 years

Hybrid

Triathlon PS

Triathlon

3.5% at 7 years

 

The New Zealand Joint Registry, Fifteen Year Report

  • Lowest rate of revision of the top 5 knee brands (ocys:0.43)22
  • Triathlon PS has the lowest revision of the top 5 knee brands for PS knees (ocys:0.48) 22
  • Triathlon CR revision rate is ocys: 0.4222
  • Number 1 knee implanted Jan 2009 to Dec 201522

Clinical Research

Harwin SF. (2013) Clinical and Patient-reported Outcomes of Primary TKA With a Single-radius Design

Harwin et al (2013) showed Triathlon survivorship with 99.7% at 7-years of follow up25. Results in this study coincide with published registry data. The study also provided evidence of improved outcomes in terms of function, stability and pain.

Santiago (2013) Cruciate-Retaining vs Posterior-Substituting Inserts in Total Knee Arthroplasty

Santiago et al (2013) demonstrated a two-year survival rate greater than 98%. The study also provided evidence of improved outcomes in terms of function, motion and pain.

Scott (2014) Five-year survivorship and patient-reported outcome of the Triathlon single-radius total knee arthroplasty

Scott et al (2014) demonstrated a 5 year survivorship of 97.6% for failure for any reason, and 99.5% for aseptic loosening24.

Proven Function

Proven Function

Clinical studies2,15,28-30, orthopaedic registry results22,31-33 and laboratory studies9,34-36 have demonstrated the potential performance and functional benefits10,15,37 of the Triathlon Knee System.

Other Clinical studies have also shown reduction in physiotherapy sessions2, more rapid abandonment of crutches,2 and less anterior knee pain15,29 comparing single radius to multiple radius knees37.

A 2013 study showed that the Triathlon knee outperformed the multiple radius knee design in level walking kinematics and kinetics38 meaning that the SR design has a higher propensity to return to normal function than a multiple radius knee

 

 

 

Extra Resources

Extra Resources

  1. Harwin S et al. Surg Technolo Int 2007; 16:199-205
  2. Gomez-Barrena E at al. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2010; 468:1214-1220
  3. Stryker Data on File, 2016
  4. Triathlon Desgin Rationale TRIATH-SS-13; USA Approved Collateral; Copyright © 2013 Stryker
  5. Iwaki Het al. J Bone Joint Surg Br; 2000; 82(8):1189-95.
  6. Hollister A et al.ClinOrthopRelat Res. 1993; May; (290):259-68
  7. Stryker Test Report MA-13-3551-TR Rev 0
  8. Stryker Test Data RD-03-041
  9. Bhimji S et al. J Knee Surgery 2008; 21: 315-319.
  10. Harwin S et al. J Knee Surg Oct 2008; 21(4):320-6
  11. US Patent 7160330
  12. Dennis D et al. ClinOrthopRelat Res Nov 2004; 428 (180–189).
  13. Greene K. Stryker Document LSA56, 2005.
  14. Nakagawa S et al. J Bone Joint Surg [Br] 2000;82-B:1199-200.
  15. Cook L et al. J Knee Surg 2012;25:249–254. 
  16. Hungerford D. S et al. Total Knee Arthroplasty: A Comprehensive Approach. Ch. 2:Anatomy and Kinematics of the Normal Knee. Williams and Wilkins. 1984. ISBN0-683-04251-3.
  17. Browne C et al. Knee 12;81 2005.
  18. Yong CK et al. Journal of Orthopaedic Surgery 2008;16(2):197-200.
  19. Habermann E, et al. White Paper: A Multicentre Review of Patella Complications Using a Modern Design Total Knee System [White Paper]. URL:http://www.stryker.ch/st_pdf_multicenter_pages.pdf. Accessed 26th April 2013
  20. Robertson et al Swedish Registry (1988-1997)
  21. National Joint Registry (NJR). National Joint Registry of England and Wales, 11th Annual Report 2014.
  22. New Zealand Orthopaedic Association (NZOA). The New Zealand Joint Registry, Fifteen Year Report, January 1999 to December 2015.
  23. Department of Orthopaedics, Skåne University Hospital, Lund. Swedish Knee Arthroplasty Register, Annual Report 2015.
  24. Scott CEH et al. Knee Surg Sports TraumatolArthrosc. Published online, 13 March 2014
  25. Harwin SF et al. Healio.com/Orthopedics. July 2013; Vol 36 (7): e877-e882
  26. Statement sourced from UK Approved TRIATH-POS-13
  27. Australian Orthopaedic Association National Joint Replacement Registry. Annual Report. Adelaide: AOA; 2016
  28. Wang H et al. J Arthroplasty. 2006;21(8):1193-1199.
  29. Mahoney O et al. Journal of Arthroplasty Vol. 17 No. 4 2002. 416-421
  30. Hitt K et al. Surgical Technology International, XVI.
  31. National Joint Registry (NJR). National Joint Registry of England and Wales, 10th Annual Report 2013.
  32. Australian Orthopaedic Association (AOA). National Joint Replacement Registry. Annual Report, 2013.
  33. Department of Orthopaedics, Skåne University Hospital, Lund. Swedish Knee Arthoplasty Register, Annual Report 2012.
  34. Designed to maintain collateral ligament stability throughout the range of motion. Stryker-Initiated Dynamic Computer Simulations of Passive ROM and Oxford Rig Test, Stephen Piazza, 2003.
  35. Stryker Orthopaedics Technical Report #RD-05-076.
  36. Stryker Test Data RD-09-088
  37. Hamilton D et al. Journal of Orth Research, Feb 2013
  38. Larsen B et al. Single-Radius Total Knee Implant Outperforms Multi-Radius Design in Level Walking Kinematics and Kinetics, Poster – to be published, 2013
Request More Information

Thank you for your interest

Thank you for interest in this product. Your details have been recorded and a representative will be contact with you shortly.

Request More Information

If you would like more information on the Triathlon product range, please complete the fields below.

register
Related Products