Oxford® Partial Knee

The most widely used4 and clinically proven5 partial knee in the world

Could you be treating your patients with a partial knee replacement?

If only one compartment of the knee is damaged, then partial knee replacement (PKR) could be a viable surgical option. With the right indications, partial knee arthroplasty (PKA) is an alternative to both total knee arthroplasty (TKA) and high tibial osteotomy. 

Research1,2 shows that nearly 50% of all knee replacement patients could be candidates for partial knee arthroplasty (PKA), and Oxford Partial Knee replacement patients are 2.7 times more likely to be satisfied than total knee patients in their ability to perform activities of daily living3. 

With over 35 years’ clinical experience the Oxford Partial Knee is the most widely used4, clinically proven5 partial knee system in the world. Oxford PKR patients have demonstrated increased patient satisfaction3, better functionality6 and fewer complications7*  compared to total knee patients.   

The Oxford Partial Knee comes with the US's only lifetime knee implant replacement warranty†. It's your assurance that Zimmer Biomet not only makes a proven partial knee, but we stand behind it 100%. 

The Zimmer Biomet Oxford Partial Knee is a medial partial knee replacement system consisting of a femoral component, a tibial component, and a freely mobile meniscal bearing, featuring: 

  • Anatomical shape of tibial component for optimal bone coverage 
  • Conforming, spherical design minimizes contact stress throughout entire range of motion4
  • Mobile bearing designed to remain fully congruent with femoral component throughout entire range of motion9
  • Microplasty® Instrumentation for a reproducible technique8

For more information on the Oxford Partial Knee visit: www.oxfordpartialknee.com

Important safety information

In the United States (US), the Oxford 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; it 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. For complete prescribing information, see the package insert and www.zimmerbiomet.com. 

Various countries outside of the US offer Oxford partial knees intended for lateral use and Oxford Partial Knees with cementless application; these devices are not available for sale in the US. Check for local product clearances and reference product specific instructions for use. 

Product Features

 

The Oxford PKR is a bi-cruciate retaining knee, meaning the healthy ACL and PCL are kept intact. Retention of the ACL is reported to result in better proprioception20,21. We also offer a solution for the lateral compartment, based on over 400 CT knee scans, the Oxford® Fixed Lateral Partial Knee was designed for optimal coverage of the lateral compartment and utilizes the Oxford Microplasty Instrumentation.

 

 

 

Advantages of PKA vs. TKA:

 

 

Many benefits of PKA versus TKA have been reported in studies such as:

 

  • Higher patient satisfaction with the ability to perform daily activities3

  • Better range of motion10,11

  • Preserving more healthy bone, as only the medial compartment is replaced

  • Better functionality22 and more natural motion6 than TKA

  • Faster recovery and shorter hospital stay than TKA with a rapid recovery protocol10

  • Fewer and less severe complications7*, compared with TKA

 

Technology

The Oxford Partial Knee uses ArCom® Direct Compression Molded Polyethylene for proven wear resistance14,15 and has been clinically tested for over 35 years. Zimmer Biomet’s Oxford Partial Knee is the most widely used partial knee in the world4. The existing design inherits the clinical results of the phase I and II implants, which have now demonstrated 20-year survivorship5 in the literature.

Important results that highlight the success and reliability of the Oxford Partial Knee include:

  • Survivorship of 94.0% at 15 years5,16,17
  • Survivorship of 91.0% at 20 years5
  • Quicker return to low-impact sports (swimming, cycling, hiking and golf) than TKA18
  • A reproducible technique with Microplasty Instrumentation8
Previous page

References

† Subject to terms and conditions within the written warranty.

* Study included Oxford Partial Knees as well as other 'non-Zimmer Biomet' partial knees

  1. Willis-Owen, et al. Unicondylar knee arthroplasty in the UK National Health Service: An analysis of candidacy, outcome and cost efficacy. ScienceDirect. The Knee 16. 473–478. 2009
  2. Berend, M. Less is More Mobile Magic. CCJR, 2012.
  3. Study by researchers at Washington University in St. Louis, Missouri, US. Portions of study funded by Biomet. Determined based on adjusted odds ratio calculation.
  4. Data on file
  5. 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.
  6. Cobb, J, et al. Functional Assessment of knee arthroplasty using an instrumented treadmill. Imperial College of London. March 8, 2012. Presentation.
  7. Brown, NM, et al. Total Knee Arthroplasty Has Higher Postoperative Morbidity Than Unicompartmental Knee Arthroplasty: A Multicenter Analysis. The Journal of Arthroplasty. (2012)
  8. Hurst JM et al. Radiographic Comparison of Mobile-Bearing Partial Knee Single-Peg versus Twin-Peg Design. The Journal of Arthroplasty. Available online since October 2014
  9. Goodfellow, J.W. and O’Connor, J.J. The Mechanics of the Knee and Prosthesis Design. JBJS Br. 60-B(3): 358–69, 1978.
  10. Lombardi, A. et al. Is Recovery Faster for Mobile-bearing Unicompartmental than Total Knee Arthroplasty? Clinical Orthopedics and Related Research. 467:1450-57. 2009.
  11. 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. Published Online.
  12. Deshmukh, RV, Scott, RD. Unicompartmental knee arthroplasty: long term results. Clinical Orthopedics and Related Research. 2001; 392:272278.
  13. Robertsson, O, et al. Use of unicompartmental instead of tricompartmental prostheses for unicompartmental arthrosis in the knee is a cost effective alternative. Acta Orthop Scand. (1999); 70(2): 170-175.
  14. Psychoyios, V et al. Wear of Congruent Meniscal Bearings in Unicompartmental Knee Arthroplasty. JBJS Br. (1998) 80-B: 876-82.
  15. Kendrick, B.J.L. et al. Polyethylene wear of mobile-bearing unicompartmental knee replacement at 20 years. J Bone Joint Surg [Br] 2011;93-B:470-5.
  16. Svard, U. and Price, A. Oxford Medial 1. Unicompartmental Knee Arthroplasty. A Survival Analysis of an Independent Series. Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery Br. 83:191–194. 2001.
  17. Price, A. et al. Long-term Clinical Results of the Medial Oxford Unicompartmental Knee Arthroplasty. Clinical Orthopedics and Related Research. 435:171–180. 2005
  18. Walton, NP. et al. Patient-Perceived Outcomes and Return to Sport and Work: TKA Versus Mini-Incision Unicompartmental Knee Arthroplasty. J Knee Surg. 2006;19:112-116.
  19. Ming, GL et al. “Mobile vs. fixed bearing unicondylar knee arthroplasty: A randomized study on short term clinical outcomes and knee kinematics.” The Knee. (2006): 365-370.
  20. Pritchett, JW. Patients Prefer A Bicruciate-Retaining or the Medial Pivot Total Knee Prosthesis. Journal of Arthoplasty. Vol. 26 No. 2 2011.
  21. Katayama, M. et al. Proprioception and Performance After Anterior Cruciate Ligament Rupture. International Orthopaedics (SICOT) (2004) 28: 278-281.
  22. Lygre, SHL et al. Pain and Function in Patients After Primary Unicompartmental and Total Knee Arthroplasty.  JBJS Am. 2010; 92:2890-2897

 

 

Legal Manufacturer:                      

Biomet UK Limited
Waterton Industrial Estate
Bridgend
CF31 3XA
United Kingdom

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.