ZUK Uni
8Pages

Unicompartmental Knee Our simple approach to proven performance

ZUK Unicompartmental Knee Simply innovative Extended posterior condyle Angled femoral pegs 2 optimally positioned pegs Round-on-flat articulation Anatomic shape 3 points of tibial fixation

Durable fixation The ZUK design is based largely upon its predecessor M/G, a product that has been used clinically since 1998. Both M/G and ZUK show excellent long-term tibial fixation clinical follow-up.12'3'4'5'7 2 optimally positioned femoral pegs Angled femoral pegs • Femoral Peg location changes by size for optimal fixation • Angled femoral pegs are designed to enhance femoral fixation by providing resistance to loosening forces during flexion upto118° 3 points of tibial fixation • 2 hour-glass pegs and the rotational fin are intended to guard against shear and rotational forces...

Universal compatibility • Optimal sizing designed to match patient anatomy • 42 possible sizing combinations Comprehensive sizing • 7 femoral sizes and 6 tibial sizes • Size specific articular surfaces offered in 1mm thickness increments

Lateral and bi-compartmental clinical solutions Freedom to perform medial, lateral and bi-compartmental procedures. . . , Bi-compartmental • A study on the use in the lateral compartment showed no revisions at 12 years.5,6,8,9 • 35diflerentsizingcombinationsto accommodate varying patient anatomies Patello-femoral arthroplasty • Independently oriented components allow precise alignment and rotation Reproducible instrumentation options Reproducible instrumentation and technique flow is designed to reduce the learning curve associated with UKAs 3 instrument options same great implant...

Simply proven The ZUK Uni Knee System is based on the established implant design of the M/G Unicompartmental Knee System. Data tables from Australian Orthopaedic Association National Joint Replacement Registry Annual Report, 2015.6 Table KP11: 10 Most Used Tibial Prostheses in Primary Unicompartmental Knee Replacement

M/G Unicompartmental Knee survivorship Mean Follow-up (Years) Vasso et al. 2015; n=125 98.4% survivorship at 6.8 years12 Biswas et al. 2013; n=85 96.5% survivorship at 10 years11 Geller et al. 2011; n= 30 89.7% survivorship at 2 years*10 *This study did not clearly identify the endpoint for measuring survivorship. In all other studies, survivorship was calculated as "revision for any reason.”

1. Galante et al. The Progression of Patellofemoral Arthrosis after Medial Unicompartmental Replacement: CORR 2004 2. Argenson JN, Blanc G, Aubaniac JM, Parratte S. Modern unicompartmental knee arthroplasty with cement: a concise follow-up, at a mean of twenty years, of a previous report. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2013;95(10):905-909. 3. Galante et al. Results of Unicompartmental Knee Arthroplasty at a Minimum of Ten Years of Follow-up. JBJS 2005 4. Akizuki et al. In Vivo Determination of Kinematics for Subjects having a Zimmer Unicompartmental High Flex Knee system. Journal of Arthroplasty....