Global

‡ In these countries please contact our distributor

JOURNEY II Knees

JOURNEY II Knee Solutions family of knee replacement products

Knee Replacement

JOURNEY II Knee System has a robust portfolio to address a wide variety of customer needs with preoperative options and intraoperative conversions. 

Learn how the JOURNEY II implants are being used with the NAVIO Surgical System for both TKA and UKA


Total Knee Replacement Solutions:

JOURNEY II BCS 

JOURNEY II CR

JOURNEY II XR

Partial Knee Replacement Solutions:

JOURNEY PFJ

JOURNEY UNI

 

References

1. Carpenter RD, et al, Magnetic resonance imaging of in vivo patellofemoral kinematics after total knee arthroplasty, The Knee (2009), doi:10.1016/j.knee.2008.12.016.

2. Brilhault J, Ries MD. Measuring patellar height using the lateral active flexion radiograph: Effect of total knee implant design. Knee. 2010 Mar;17(2):148-51. doi: 10.1016/j.knee.2009.07.008.   Epub 2009 Aug 31.

3. Lee GC, Garino JP, Kim RH, Lenz N. Contributions of Femoral, Tibial and Patellar Malposition to Patellar Maltracking in Total Knee Arthroplasty. AAOS. 2013; Poster No. 114.

4. Hunter, G., and Long, M. Abrasive Wear of Oxidized Zr-2.5Nb, CoCrMo, and Ti-6Al-4V Against Bone Cement. 6th World Biomaterials Cong. Trans., Society for Biomaterials, Minneapolis, MN, 2000, p. 835.

5. Long, M., Riester, L., and Hunter, G. no-hardness Measurements of Oxidized Zr-2.5Nb and Various Orthopaedic Materials. Trans. Soc. Biomaterials, 21, 1998, p. 528.

6. Poggie RA, Wert J, Mishra A, et al (1992). Friction and wear characterization of UHMWPE in reciprocating sliding contact with Co-Cr, Ti-6Al-4V, and zirconia implant bearing surfaces. Wear and Friction of Elastomers, Denton R and Keshavan MK, Eds., West Conshohocken, PA: ASTM International.

7. Nasser, S.: Biology of Foreign Bodies: Tolerance, Osteolysis and Allergy in Total Knee Arthroplasty, Edited by J. Bellemans, M.D. Ries and J. Victor; Springer -Verlag, Heidelberg, 2005.

TKA

JOURNEY II Total Knee System - Rediscover normal

Enabling patients to return to their perceived normal lifestyle is the driving need for total knee design. To achieve patient satisfaction and help them rediscover their normal, Smith & Nephew introduced the JOURNEY II knee. It is the only prosthesis designed and demonstrated to replicate normal knee positions, shapes, and motions.3

Products in the JOURNEY II TKA portfolio:

JOURNEY II BCS

JOURNEY II CR

JOURNEY II XR

Technology and products used with the JOURNEY II TKA portfolio:

VERILAST Technology for knee replacement

VISIONAIRE Cutting Guides for knee replacement

NAVIO Surgical System, robotics-assisted solution 

 

Indications for use include:

  • rheumatoid arthritis;
  • post-traumatic arthritis,
  • osteoarthritis or degenerative arthritis;
  • failed osteotomies or unicompartmental replacement.

JOURNEY II TKA chart

References

1.  Short-term Range of Motion is Increased after TKA with an asymmetric bicruciatestabilized implant.AcceptedPoster Presentation, AAOS 2018 New Orleans. Kaitlin M. Carroll, Peter K. Sculco, Brian CMichaels,RichardL. Murphy, Seth A, Jerabek, David J. Mayman

2.  Hommel, Hagen, and Kai Wilke. “Good Early Results Obtained with a Guided-Motion Implant for Total Knee Arthroplasty: A Consecutive Case Series.” The Open OrthopaedicsJournal 11 (2017): 51–56. PMC. Web. 27 Sept. 2017.

3.  Kaneko, Takao et al. Bi-cruciate substituting total knee arthroplasty improved medio-lateral instability in mid-flexion range. Journal of Orthopaedics. 14. 201-206. 10.1016.

4.  Grieco, Trevor F., et al. “In Vivo Kinematic Comparison of a BicruciateStabilized Total Knee Arthroplasty and the Normal Knee Using Fluoroscopy.” The Journal of Arthroplasty, 2017, doi:10.1016/j.arth.2017.09.035.

5.  Iriuchishima, Takanori, and KeinosukeRyu. “A Comparison of Rollback Ratio between BicruciateSubstituting Total Knee Arthroplasty and Oxford UnicompartmentalKnee Arthroplasty.” The Journal of Knee Surgery, 2017, doi:10.1055/s-0037-1604445.

6.  Testing concluded at 45 million cycles, ISO 14242-1 and 14243-3 define test completion at 5 million cycles.

7.  DeHaanAM, Huff, TW; Patient-Specific Versus Conventional Instrumentation for Total Knee Arthroplasty: Peri-Operative and Cost Differences; J Arthroplasty; 2014.

8.  Unplanned Readmission After Total Joint Arthroplasty: Rates, Reasons, And Risk Factors -The Journal Of Bone & Joint Surgery -jbjs.org -Volume 95-A -Number 20 October 16, 2013.

9.  Data on file with Smith & Nephew.

Partial Knee

Partial Knee options

JOURNEY PFJ

  • Anatomic design conforms to patient anatomy and improves patella tracking
  • ‘S’ shaped trochlear groove is designed to provide optimal patella tracking
  • Four peg divergent design allows for superior fixation
  • Grit blasted undersurface has shown excellent long term fixation

Learn more about JOURNEY PFJ

JOURNEY UNI

  • Patella bend provides patella relief from impingement while tracking
  • Anatomic bend restores the bone with a more conforming fit and natural feel
  • Round on flat design allows for anatomically driven kinematics
  • Twin peg and scaled to provide excellent fixed bearing tibial fixation
  • Flex cut and divergent lugs ar designed to provide superior femoral fixation for active patients 

Learn more about JOURNEY UNI 

References

References

1. US Department of Health and Human Services Agency (HHSA) for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ) Knee Replacements Up Dramatically Among Adults 45 to 64 Years Old. AHRQ News and Numbers, November 3, 2011. Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, Rockville, MD. (http://www.ahrq.gov/news/nn/nn110311.htm)

2. Phil Noble et al; Does total knee replacement restore normal knee function? 2005; CORR. (431): 157-65.

3. Huch K, Müller KA, Stürmer T, Brenner H, Puhl W, Günther KP. Sports activities 5 years after total knee or hip arthroplasty: the Ulm Osteoarthritis Study. Ann Rheum Dis. 2005 Dec; 64 (12):1715-20.

4. Comparing patient outcomes after THA and TKA: is there a difference? Bourne RB, Chesworth B, Davis A, Mahomed N, Charron K. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2010 Feb; 468(2):542-6. Epub 2009 Sep 4. (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19760472)

5. Functional comparison of posterior cruciate-retained versus cruciate-sacrificed total knee arthroplasty. Dorr LD, Ochsner JL, Gronley J, Perry J. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1988 Nov; (236):36-43. (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/3180584)

6. Victor J, Mueller JK, Komistek RD, Sharma A, Nadaud MC, Bellemans J. In vivo kinematics after a cruciate-substituting TKA. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2010 Mar; 468(3):807-14.

7. Zingde SM, Sharma A, Komistek RD, Dennis, DA, Mahfouz, MR. In vivo comparison of kinematics for 1891 non-implanted and implanted knees. AAOS. 2009; Scientific Exhibit No. 22.

8. Zingde SM, Mueller J, Komistek RD, MacNaughton JM, Anderle MR, Mauhfouz MR. In vivo comparison of tka kinematics for subjects having a PS, PCR, or Bi-Cruciate Stabilizing design. Orthopedic Research Society. 2009; Paper No. 2067.

9. Bicruciate-stabilised total knee replacements produce more normal sagittal plane kinematics than posterior-stabilised designs.Ward TR, Burns AW, Gillespie MJ, Scarvell JM, Smith PN J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2011 Jul;93(7):907-13.

10. Catani F, Ensini A, Belvedere C, Feliciangeli A, Benedetti MG, Leardini A, Giannini S. In vivo kinematics and kinetics of a bi-cruciate substituting total knee arthroplasty: a combined fluoroscopic and gait analysis study. J Orthop Res. 2009 Dec;27(12):1569-75.

11. Morra EA, Rosca M, Greenwald JFI, Greenwald AS. The influence of contemporary knee design on high flexion: a kinematic comparison with the normal knee. JBJS Am. 2008; 90: 195-201.

12. The Mark Coventry Award: Articular contact estimation in TKA using in vivo kinematics and finite element analysis. Catani F, Innocenti B, Belvedere C, Labey L, Ensini A, Leardini A. Clin Orthop Relat Res.
2010 Jan; 468(1):19-28. doi: 10.1007/s11999-009-0941-4. Epub 2009 Jun 23.

13. Van Duren BH, Pandit H, Price M, Tilley S, Gill HS, Murray DW, Thomas NP. Bicruciate substituting total knee replacement: how effective are the added kinematic constraints in vivo? Knee Surg Sports
Traumatol Arthrosc. 2012 Oct; 20 (10):2002-10. Epub 2011 Nov 29.

14. Arbuthnot JE, Brink RB. Assessment of the antero-posterior and rotational stability of the anterior cruciate ligament analogue in a guided motion bi-cruciate stabilized total knee arthroplasty. J Med Eng
Technol. 2009;33(8):610-5.

15. Lester DK and Shantharam R. Objective Sagittal Instability of CR-TKA by Functional EMG During Normal Walking. AAOS. 2012; Presentation No. 810.

16.  Pritchett JW. Patient preferences in knee prostheses. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2004 Sep; 86(7):979-82.

17.  Pritchett JW. Anterior cruciate-retaining total knee arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty. 1996 Feb; 11(2):194-7.

18. Rajgopal A; Dahiya V; Kochhar H. Bi-Cruciate Substituting Total Knee Arthroplasty Early Experience. International Society for Technology in Arthroplasty: 22 Congress. 2009; Poster No. 107.

19. Haas S. Kinematics of the Knee & JOURNEY BCS. Insall Club Annual Meeting. June 2010.

20. Banks SA; Fregly BJ; Boniforti F; Reinschmidt C; Romagnoli S. Comparing in vivo kinematics of unicondylar and bi-unicondylar knee replacements. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 2005 Oct; 13(7):551-6. Epub 2005 Jan 20.

21. Mahfouz MR, Komistek RD, Dennis DA, Hoff WA. In vivo assessment of the kinematics in normal and anterior cruciate ligament-deficient knees. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2004;86-A Suppl 2:56-61.

22. Carpenter RD, et al, Magnetic resonance imaging of in vivo patellofemoral kinematics after total knee arthroplasty, The Knee (2009), doi:10.1016/j.knee.2008.12.016

23. Brilhault J, Ries MD. Measuring patellar height using the lateral active flexion radiograph: Effect of total knee implant design. Knee. 2010 Mar;17(2):148-51. doi: 10.1016/j.knee.2009.07.008.
Epub 2009 Aug 31.

24. Leopold SS, Silverton CD, Barden RM, Rosenberg AG. Isolated revision of the patellar component in total knee arthroplasty. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2003; 85-A:41–7. (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12533570)

25. Breugem SJ, van Ooij B, Haverkamp D, Sierevelt IN, van Dijk CN. No difference in anterior knee pain between a fixed and a mobile posterior stabilized total knee arthroplasty after 7.9 years. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 2012 Nov 3. [Epub ahead of print] (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23124601)

26. Lee GC, Garino JP, Kim RH, Lenz N. Contributions of Femoral, Tibial and Patellar Malposition to Patellar Maltracking in Total Knee Arthroplasty. AAOS. 2013; Poster No. 114

27. Nha KW, Papannagari R, Gill TJ, Van de Velde SK, Freiberg AA, Rubash HE, Li G. In vivo patellar tracking: clinical motions and patellofemoral indices. J Orthop Res. 2008 Aug;26(8):1067-74.

28. Victor J, Ries M, Bellemans J, Robb WM, Van Hellemondt G. High-flexion, motion-guided total knee arthroplasty: who benefits the most? Orthopedics. 2007 Aug; 30 (8 Suppl): 77–9.
(http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed?term=High-flexion%2C%20motion-guided%20total%20knee%20arthroplasty%3A%20who%20benefits%20the%20most)

29. Kuroyanagi Y, Mu S, Hamai S, Robb WJ, Banks SA. In vivo knee kinematics during stair and deep flexion activities in patients with bicruciate substituting total knee arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty. 2012 Jan; 27(1):122-8. doi: 10.1016/j.arth.2011.03.005. Epub 2011 Apr 19.

30. H. M. J. McEwen, P. I. Barnett, C. J. Bell, R. Farrar, D. D. Auger, M. H. Stone and J. Fisher, The influence of design, materials and kinematics on the in vitro wear of total knee replacements, J Biomech, 2005;38(2):357-365.

31. A. Parikh, M. Morrison and S. Jani, Wear testing of crosslinked and conventional UHMWPE against smooth and roughened femoral components, Orthop Res Soc, San Diego, CA, Feb 11-14, 2007, 0021.

32. AA. Essner, L. Herrera, S. S. Yau, A. Wang, J. H. Dumbleton and M. T. Manley, Sequentially crosslinked and annealed UHMWPE knee wear debris, Orthop Res Soc, Washington D.C., 2005, 71.

33. L. Herrera, J. Sweetgall, A. Essner and A. Wang, “Evaluation of sequentially crosslinked and annealed wear debris, World Biomater Cong, Amsterdam, May 28-Jun 1, 2008, 583.

34.  C. Schaerer, K. Mimnaugh, O. Popoola and J. Seebeck, “Wear of UHMWPE tibial inserts under simulated obese patient conditions,” Orthop Res Soc, New Orleans, LA, Feb 6-10, 2010, 2329.

35.  Biomet publication, FDA Cleared Claims for E1 Antioxidant Infused Technology” http://www.biomet.com/orthopedics/getFile.cfm?id=2657&rt=inline

36.  Ref: DePuy Attune 510 K Document K101433 Dec 10, 2010

37.  Ref: Smith & Nephew OR-12-129 (on file with Smith & Nephew)

38.  Hunter, G., and Long, M. Abrasive Wear of Oxidized Zr-2.5Nb, CoCrMo, and Ti-6Al-4V Against Bone Cement. 6th World Biomaterials Cong. Trans., Society for Biomaterials, Minneapolis, MN, 2000, p. 835.

39.  Long, M., Riester, L., and Hunter, G. no-hardness Measurements of Oxidized Zr-2.5Nb and Various Orthopaedic Materials. Trans. Soc. Biomaterials, 21, 1998, p. 528.

40.  Poggie RA, Wert J, Mishra A, et al (1992). Friction and wear characterization of UHMWPE in reciprocating sliding contact with Co-Cr, Ti-6Al-4V, and zirconia implant bearing surfaces. Wear and Friction of Elastomers, Denton R and Keshavan MK, Eds., West Conshohocken, PA: ASTM International.

41.  Nasser, S.: Biology of Foreign Bodies: Tolerance, Osteolysis and Allergy in Total Knee Arthroplasty, Edited by J. Bellemans, M.D. Ries and J. Victor; Springer -Verlag, Heidelberg, 2005

42.  Cartier P, Khefacha A, Sanouiller JL, Frederick K. Unicondylar knee arthroplasty in middle-aged patients: a minimum 5-year follow-up. Orthopedics. 2007 Aug; 30 (8 Suppl):62-5.
(http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed?term=cartier%20genesis)