There seems to be a growing consensus among orthopaedic surgeons that implants that retain the anterior cruciate ligament and preserve more of the articular geometry provide distinct advantages of superior proprioception, kinematics, and a more rapid recovery over tricompartmental knee replacement.  Despite these benefits, isolated unicompartmental disease is rare. As with any surgery performed less frequently, the learning curve can be an issue, and literature has cited instances where more technically demanding UKA systems may have a higher failure rate.^1,2

Out of the need for a simplified procedure that retained versatility the JOURNEY^◊ UNI Unicompartmental Knee System was born.  It represents a continuation of the legacy of Smith & Nephew’s unicompartmental products, from the 1970s with the Marmor design to today with the clinically successful GENESIS^◊ resurfacing unicompartmental system.  As a member of the JOURNEY^◊ Active Knee Solutions family, it also capitalizes on some of the design features first developed for the JOURNEY^◊ BCS Bi-Cruciate Stabilized Knee System.  Ultimately, the needs and preferences of orthopaedic surgeons performing UKAs were the driving force behind the design and development of the JOURNEY^◊ UNI system.  The key design goals are focused on:

   1. Optimizing implant design through shape and size

   2. Simplifying technique through streamlined instrumentation and familiar principles

   3. Increasing longevity through use of an advanced bearing material

References

1. Lewold S, Goodman S, Knutson K, Robertsson O, Lidgren L. Oxford meniscal bearing knee versus the Marmor knee in unicompartmental arthroplasty for arthrosis. A Swedish multicenter survival study. J Arthroplasty. 1995 Dec;10(6):722–731.

2. Robertsson O, Knutson K, Lewold S, Lidgren L. The routine of surgical management reduces failure after unicompartmental knee arthroplasty. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2001 Jan;83(1):45–49.