Partial Knee Arthroplasty: the Gateway to Outpatient Joint Replacement

Partial_Cemented_Group_PersonaPartial_OxfordPartial_PFJ_CMYK

Literature has shown partial knee outpatient surgery can facilitate the following, compared to TKA:

  • Faster Recovery1
  • Fewer perioperative complications2
  • Higher patient satisfaction1,2

Zimmer Biomet is the leading company in partial knee arthroplasty (PKA)3 with over 40 years’ experience, offering a comprehensive range of anatomic and innovative solutions:

  • The Oxford® Partial Knee System**, the most clinically proven4,5 and widely used3 partial knee in the world
  • The Gender Solutions® Patello-Femoral Joint System, designed to address the anatomic differences among men and women
  • And now the Persona® Partial Knee, the next era in personalization providing compartment-specific shapes, precise and efficient instrumentation, and a an ergonomic spacer block technique with fewer steps*

Research shows that surgeons utilizing PKA for at least 20% of their annual knee arthroplasties experienced a significant decrease in their revision rate.6 One study indicated that almost 50% of knee arthroplasty patients are candidates for PKA.7

In fact, a study by Badawy, M. et al. found a lower risk of revision in hospitals performing more than 40 PKAs per year compared to those performing under 10 PKAs per year.8

After one year, a randomized, controlled study also showed that significantly more PKA patients would choose to have their operation again, compared to TKA patients.9

Other benefits of PKA vs TKA include retention of the ACL, which is reported to result in improved proprioception10,11 better range of motion12,13 procedural savings7, shorter hospital stays14 and a lower risk of postoperative complications15.

References

* Compared to Zimmer Miller Galante Uni. The M/G trademark is owned by Smith & Nephew

 

** In the United States (US), the Oxford Mobile Bearing Partial Knee is intended for use in individuals with osteoarthritis or avascular necrosis limited to the medial compartment of the knee and is intended to be implanted with bone cement.  The Oxford Partial Knee is not indicated for use in the lateral compartment or for patients with ligament deficiency.  Potential risks include, but are not limited to, loosening, dislocation, fracture, wear and infection, any of which can require additional surgery.

  1. Reilly, K. et al. Efficacy of an accelerated recovery protocol for Oxford unicompartmental knee arthroplasty--a randomised controlled trial. The Knee 12 (2005) 351–357.
  2. Gondusky, J. et al. Day of Surgery Discharge after Unicompartmental Knee Arthroplasty: An Effective Perioperative Pathway The Journal of Arthroplasty. Volume 29, Issue 3, March 2014, Pages 516-519.
  3. Data on file at Zimmer Biomet. Based on Market Analysis and Registry Data, gathered September 2017.
  4. Price, A. and Svard, U. A Second Decade Lifetable Survival Analysis of the Oxford Unicompartmental Knee Arthroplasty. Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research. Published Online 13 August 2010.
  5. Pandit et al. The clinical outcome of minimally invasive phase 3 Oxford unicompartmental knee arthroplasty. Bone Joint J 2015;97-B:1493–1500.
  6. Liddle et al. Optimal usage of unicompartmental knee arthroplasty A STUDY OF 41 986 CASES FROM THE NATIONAL JOINT REGISTRY FOR ENGLAND AND WALES. Bone Joint J 2015;97-B:1506–11. Study only covered medial lateral partial knee replacements; patello femoral joint replacements were not included in the study.
  7. Willis-Owen CA, et al. Unicondylar knee arthroplasty in the UK National Health Service: An analysis of candidacy, outcome and cost efficacy. Knee. 2009 Dec;16(6):473–8.
  8. Badawy, M et al. Higher revision risk for unicompartmental knee arthroplasty in low-volume hospitals Data from 5,791 cases in the Norwegian Arthroplasty Register. Acta Orthopaedica 2014; 85 (4): 342–347.
  9. Beard D, Price A, Davies L, et al. A Multicentre Randomised Study Comparing Total or Partial Knee Replacement – One Year Results of The Topkat Trial. BASK. Liverpool, UK 2016.
  10. Pritchett, JW. Patients Prefer A Bicruciate-Retaining or the Medial Pivot Total Knee Prosthesis. Journal of Arthoplasty. Vol. 26 No. 2 2011.
  11. Katayama, M. et al. Proprioception and Performance After Anterior Cruciate Ligament Rupture. International Orthopaedics (SICOT)
  12. Amin A, et al. Unicompartmental or Total Knee Replacement? A Direct Comparative Study of Survivorship and Clinical Outcome at Five Years. JBJS Br. 2006; 88-B; Suppl 1, 100.
  13. Jones, GG, et al. Gait comparison of unicompartmental and total knee arthroplasties with healthy controls. Bone Joint J 2016;(10 SupplB):16–21.
  14. Lombardi, A. et al. Is Recovery Faster for Mobile-bearing Unicompartmental than Total Knee Arthroplasty? Clinical Orthopedics and Related Research. 467:1450-57. 2009.
  15. Brown, NM, et al. Total Knee Arthroplasty Has Higher Postoperative Morbidity Than Unicompartmental Knee Arthroplasty: A Multicenter Analysis. The Journal of Arthroplasty. (2012).
All content herein is protected by copyright, trademarks and other intellectual property rights, as applicable, owned by or licensed to Zimmer Biomet or its affiliates unless otherwise indicated, and must not be redistributed, duplicated or disclosed, in whole or in part, without the express written consent of Zimmer Biomet.  
This material is intended for health care professionals. Distribution to any other recipient is prohibited.
For product information, including indications, contraindications, warnings, precautions, potential adverse effects and patient counseling information, see the package insert and information on this website. To obtain a copy of the current Instructions for Use (IFU) for full prescribing and risk information, please call 1-800-348-2759, press 4 for 411 Technical Support.