Surgical Robotics Technology
Smith+Nephew today announces the introduction of its JOURNEY II ROX Total Knee Solution – a reverse hybrid construct for total knee arthroplasty. This new procedural product solution aims to provide surgeons with the clinical advantage of an advanced bearing material and anatomic design combined with the efficiency1 and potential long-term tibia fixation of a cementless knee.
The JOURNEY II ROX Total Knee Solution combines several of Smith+Nephew’s high performance technologies in one construct – the characteristic kinematics2-8 of JOURNEY II TKA, the clinical history*9,10 of CONCELOC◊ Advanced Porous Titanium and the wear resistance of OXINIUM◊ Oxidized Zirconium.11-13 The JOURNEY II ROX Total Knee Solution is also compatible with Smith+Nephew’s CORI◊ Surgical System enabling surgeons to perform the procedure using next generation robotics-assisted technology.
“The reverse hybrid combination provides my patients with a powerful collection of knee arthroplasty technologies. The kinematic functionality of JOURNEY II, the biocompatibility and longevity benefits of an oxidized zirconium alloy femoral component in OXINIUM and now CONCELOC,” said Dr. Steven B. Haas, Chief, the Knee Service and John N. Insall Chair, Knee Surgery at the Hospital for Special Surgery in New York. “CONCELOC offers the potential to achieve osseointegration where it is needed – the tibia and patellae. It’s an evidence-based approach to knee arthroplasty that utilizes high performance technologies delivered with the operative time savings recognized in a complete cementless procedure.”
“The reverse hybrid technique works very well in my hands and I’m able to ensure my patients have the opportunity to harness the JOURNEY II knee mechanics for a more natural knee function,” said Dr. Matthew Bullock, Associate Professor of Orthopaedic Surgery, Marshall University, Joan C. Edwards School of Medicine. “The hybrid approach does not add time to my cases – in fact, I find that using the porous tibia and patella components reduces my operative time by approximately 15 minutes instead of waiting for cement to cure.”
“Driving procedural innovation to help surgeons treat patients and provide better outcomes is the core of our purpose – Life Unlimited,” said Randy Kilburn, Executive Vice President and General Manager, Global Joint Reconstruction and Robotics at Smith+Nephew. “The JOURNEY II ROX Total Knee Solution underscores this by bringing together high performance components to deliver a custom procedural solution that no other company offers.”
Source: Smith+Nephew
References
1. Yayac M, Harrer S, Hozack WJ, Parvizi J, Courtney M. The use of cementless components does not significantly increase procedural costs in total
knee arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty. 2020;35:407-712
2. Grieco TF, Sharma A, Dessinger GM, Cates HE, Komistek RD. In Vivo Kinematic Comparison of a Bicruciate Stabilized Total Knee Arthroplasty and the Normal Knee Using Fluoroscopy. J Arthroplasty. 2018;33(2):565-571.
3. Iriuchishima T, Ryu K. A Comparision of Rollback Ratio between Bicruciate Substituting Total Knee Arthroplasty and Oxford Unicompartmental Knee Arthroplasty. J Knee Surg. 2018;31(6):568-572.
4. Murakami K, Hamai S, Okazaki K, et al. Knee kinematics in bi-cruciate stabilized total knee arthroplasty during squatting and stair-climbing activities. J Orthop. 2018;15(2):650-654.
5. Murakami K, Hamai S, Okazaki K, et al. In vivo kinematics of gait in posterior-stabilized and bicruciate-stabilized total knee arthroplasties using image-matching techniques. Int Orthop. 2018;42(11):2573-2581.
6. Smith LA, Nachtrab J, LaCour M, et al. In Vivo Knee Kinematics: How Important Are the Roles of Femoral Geometry and the Cruciate Ligaments? J Arthroplasty. 2021;36:1445-1454.
7. Carpenter RD, Brilhault J, Majumdar S, Ries MD. Magnetic resonance imaging of in vivo patellofemoral kinematics after total knee arthroplasty. Knee. 2009;16(5):332-336.
8. Catani F, Ensini A, Belvedere C, et al. In vivo kinematics and kinetics of a bi-cruciate substituting total knee arthroplasty: a combined fluoroscopic and gait analysis study. J Orthop Res. 2009;27(12):1569-1575
9. Moriarty P, Vles G, Haddad F, Konan S. Early clinical and radiological outcomes of a new tapered fluted titanium monobloc revision stem in hip arthroplasty. Act Orthop Trauma Surg. 2021;141:1065-1071.
10. Smith+Nephew 2015. Orthopaedic Research Report OR-14-091A.
Technology for THA. Poster presented at: 2013 Annual Meeting of the Orthopaedic Research Society. Poster no. 1028.
11. Papannagari R, Hines G, Sprague J, Morrison M. Long-term wear performance of an advanced bearing technology for TKA. Poster presented at: 2011 Annual Meeting of the Orthopaedic Research Society. Poster no. 1141.
12. DesJardins J, Burnikel B, LaBerge M. UHMWPE wear against roughened oxidized zirconium and CoCr femoral knee components during force-controlled simulation. Wear. 2008;264:245-256
13. Ries MD, Salehi A, Widding K, Hunter G. Polyethylene wear performance of oxidized zirconium and cobalt-chromium knee components under abrasive conditions. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2002;84-A Suppl 2:129-135
*Clinical history based on Smith+Nephew’s REDAPT◊ Revision Hip System
