Unity Knee™
Unity DPI
Unity CS
Unity Knee™
Stability and satisfaction through joint line preservation
Read More
About
Unity Knee is clinically proven1 with a strong correlation to patient satisfaction2. Soft tissues are balanced to drive knee kinematics using modern surgical principles either manually or with the OMNIBotics® robotic platform. Unity Knee, developed by a global team of designer surgeons, incorporates implant and instrument designs focusing on MCL isometry and medial joint line preservation to restore the joint function.
Video
Features and benefits
The harmony between the design of Unity Knee implants and instruments creates the stability and satisfaction that every surgeon and patient needs by prioritising medial ligament isometry.
Stability by design
Unity Knee focuses on two main principles:
- Ligament isometry throughout range of motion by preserving the medial joint line with a single radius femoral design and medial referencing instrumentation.
- High rotational freedom on the tibial inserts and optimised sizing to allow patient-specific kinematics.
Personalised alignment
Optimising implant positioning for each patient by using the Unity Knee EquiBalance™, which is designed to allow:
- Ligament balancing in flexion and extension
- ‘Anatomic’ alignment principles
- Minimised soft tissue releases in TKR
* To learn more about our robotic solutions please visit OMNIBotics®
Versatile
Wide variety of implant constraint available from cruciate retaining and condylar stabilised to posterior stabilised. The built-in modularity of the Unity Knee PS femur and tibial tray allows direct compatibility with stems and augments to simplify your difficult primary knee.
Unity Knee instrumentation is available in standard or streamlined sets to suit your specific requirements.
Predictive Balance™
Unity Knee is available with ApolloKnee™ robotic-assisted technology, providing predictive gap balancing throughout range of motion. Advanced femoral planning optimises gaps and implant position which has been shown to improve intraoperative accuracy, reduce soft tissue releases and improve postoperative patient satisfaction at 12 months compared to conventional knee replacement3,4,5.
References
- Pourmoghaddam A, Dettmer M, Malanka S, Kreuzer S. Comparison of Functional Outcomes ofTotal Knee Arthroplasty Using Two Different Single Radius Implants. Reconstructive Review. 2016Mar, Vol 6 (1):43-48
- Van Onsem S, The objective substrates of patient satisfaction after total knee arthroplasty, Ghent University, 2018
- Koulalis D, O'Loughlin PF, Plaskos C, Kendoff D, Cross MB, Pearle AD. Sequential versus automated cutting guides in computer-assisted total knee arthroplasty. The Knee 18 (2011) 436–442
- Peters CL, Jimenez C, Erickson J, Anderson MB, Pelt CE. Lessons learned from selective soft-tissue release for gap balancing in primary total knee arthroplasty: an analysis of 1216 consecutive total knee arthroplasties: AAOS exhibit selection. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2013;95(20):e152. doi:10.2106/JBJS.L.01686
- Keggi JM, Lawrence JM, Randall AL, DeClaire JH, Shalhoub S, Plaskos C. Early Clinical Outcomes of a Novel Predictive Ligament Balancing Technique for Total Knee Arthroplasty. CAOS Int’l Conference 2019
Request more information
Important information
Not all products are available or cleared for distribution in all markets. For more details please contact us.
English
French