It is at a great question but with no definite answer to it, as the survivial of a prosthesis is multi factorial.

The only way to answer this question is the reading and analysis of the national registries, as they represent in simple terms the survivorship of he components in the hands of the average surgeon. This way someone can also choose the best "behaving" prosthesis

Observational studies like National Registry must fulfill a number of critical methodological prerequisites. External validity of registry studies depends on a high degree of completeness and coverage. These numbers have to be supplied in each registry-derived publication, and the quality of the registration process must be continuously validated. But, even if such basic requirements are fulfilled, registry-based research can be criticized and questioned due to several methodological limitations. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4366656/

I agree completely with Mr Vaishya's opinion about the registries' limitations and their statistical interpretations, but registries are the "crude" way to understand behaviour of a prosthesis when this is implanted by the "general population" of Mr Average of the surgeons.

I agree with George. Since, there is no fool proof method to track the performance of the prostheses, the National registry seem an accepted and better alternative choice.

Since patients have a wide range of activity levels and other health variables that impact weight bearing and mobility, I would agree that such a prediction would be difficult.