Remix your reconstruction

Surgeons continue to pursue solutions in TKA to both improve patient satisfaction - by making the knee feel more normal - and reduce some of the most common failure modes such as tibial aseptic loosening, instability and infection.1,2 However, current implant designs have not addressed both objectives and literature still cites that up to 20% of patients are not satisfied.3-5

We mix things up on our approach to TKA, combining the anatomic design and normal kinematics6-10 of JOURNEY II TKA with the cutting-edge technology of CONCELOC Advanced Porous Titanium and the unrivalled material science11-17 of OXINIUM Oxidized Zirconium, to build the foundation for outcomes youll want on repeat.

We call it our greatest hits. You’ll call it a best-in-class knee construct.

Product Features


Medical Education

No results


*Compared to non-JOURNEY II knees

We thank the patients and staff of all the hospitals in England, Wales and Northern Ireland who have contributed data to the National Joint Registry. We are grateful to the Healthcare Quality Improvement Partnership (HQIP), the NJR Steering Committee and staff at the NJR Centre for facilitating this work.

The views expressed represent those of Smith+Nephew and do not necessarily reflect those of the National Joint Registry Steering Committee or the Health Quality Improvement Partnership (HQIP) who do not vouch for how the information is presented.

The data used for this analysis was obtained from the National Joint Registry (“NJR”), part of the Healthcare Quality Improvement Partnership (“HQIP”).

HQIP, the NJR and/or its contractor, Northgate Public Services (UK) Limited (“NPS”) take no responsibility (except as prohibited by law) for the accuracy, currency, reliability and correctness of any data used or referred to in this report, nor for the accuracy, currency, reliability and correctness of links or references to other information sources and disclaims all warranties in relation to such data, links and references to the maximum extent permitted by legislation including any duty of care to third party readers of the data analysis.

For detailed product information, including indications for use, contraindications, precautions and warnings, please consult the product’s applicable Instructions for Use (IFU) prior to use.

1. National Joint Registry Summary Report.GENESIS II. November 2020.
2. Sharkey PF, et al. J Arthroplasty. 2014;29(9):1774-1778.
3. Varacallo M,et al. J Orthop. 2018;15:495–499.
4. Bryan S, et al. BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2018;19:423.
5. Scott CEH, et al. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2010;92-B(9):1253- 1258.
6. Iriuchishima T, et al. J Knee Surg. 2018;31(6):568-572.
7. MurakamiK,et al. J Orthop. 2018;15(2):650-654.
8. Grieco TF, et al. J Arthroplasty. 2018;33(2):565-571.
9. Smith LA, et al. J Arthroplasty. 2021;36:1445-1454.
10. Murakami K et al. Int Orthop. 2018;42(11):2573- 2581.
11. Papannagari R, et al. Long-term wear performance of an advanced bearing technology for TKA. Poster presented at: 2011 Annual Meeting of the Orthopaedic Research Society. Poster no. 1141.
12. Hunter G, et al. Journal of ASTM International. 2005;2:1-14.
13. Long M, et al. Nano-hardness Measurements of Oxidized Zr-2.5Nb and Various Orthopaedic Materials. Abstract presented at: 24th Annual Meeting of the Society for Biomaterials. April 22-26, 1998, San Diego, California.
14. Parikh A, et al. Long-term Simulator Wear Performance of an Advanced Bearing Technology for THA. Poster presented at: 2013 Annual Meeting of the Orthopaedic Research Society. Poster no. 1028.
15. Parikh A, et al. Wear of conventional and highly crosslinked polyethylene liners during simulated fast walking/jogging. Poster presented at: 55th Annual Meeting of the Orthopaedic Research Society, 2009. Poster no. 2340.
16. Dalal A, et al. J Biomed Mater Res Part A. 2012;100A:2147-2158.
17. Pawar V, et al. Acidic Fretting Tests of Oxidized Zr-2.5Nb, CoCr and SS Femoral Heads. Paper presented at: Materials & Processes for Medical Devices Conference, ASMI, St. Paul, Minnesota, 2004.
18. Mayman DJ, et al. Hospital Related Clinical and Economic Outcomes of a Bicruciate Knee System in Total Knee Arthroplasty Patients. Poster presented at: ISPOR Symposium;19-23 May, 2018; Baltimore, Maryland, USA. 19.Nodzo SR, et al. Tech Orthop. 2018;33(1):37-41.
20. Di Benedetto P, et al. Acta Biomed. 2019;90:9-97.
21.Takubo A, et al. J Knee Surg. 2017;30(7):725-729.
22. Noble PC, et al. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2012;470(1):20-32. 23. Kaneko T et al. J Orthop. 2017;14(1):201-206.
24.Hyodo K, et al. Arthroplast Today. 2020;6(3):338-342.
25.Hada M, et al. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 2018;26(6):1709-1716.
26. Smith+Nephew 2012. JRN2 KneeSim Analysis Memo.
27. Fenwick S, et al. World Biomater Cong, Amsterdam, NL, May 28-Jun 1, 2008,233.
28. Smith+Nephew 2016. OR-16-009.
29. 2005 ASM International Engineering Materials Achievement Award.
30. Innocenti M, et al. The Knee. 2014;21:858–861.
31. Civinini R, et al. HSS Journal. 2017;13:28-31.
32. Civinini R, et al. HSS Journal. 2017;13:32-34.
33. ASTM International Standard Specification for Wrought Zirconium-2.5 Niobium Alloy for Surgical Implant Applications (UNS R60901) Designation: F 2384 – 10.
34. ASTM International Standard Specification for Wrought Cobalt-28 Chromium-6 Molybdenum Alloys for Surgical Implants (UNS R31537, UNS R31538, and UNS R31539): Designation: F1537-20.
35.Aldinger P, et al. Accelerated Fretting Corrosion Testing of Zirconia Toughened Alumina Composite Ceramic and a New Composition of Ceramicised Metal Femoral Heads. Poster presented at: 2017 Annual Meeting of the Orthopaedic Research Society. Poster no. 1037.
36. Smith+Nephew 2016. OR-16-127.