GMK® Sphere Medially Stabilized Knee has reached the significant milestone of 100,000 devices implanted worldwide. This innovative implant offers a comprehensive solution for Total Knee Replacement to address the unique needs of patients and surgeons.
Francesco Siccardi, CEO of Medacta, says: “GMK Sphere has been a key factor in Medacta’s growth, as it perfectly embodies our vision to improve the care and well-being of orthopaedic and spine surgery patients around the world through our experience and passion. We are very proud to celebrate the milestone of 100,000 implants worldwide and we’ll keep expanding our product portfolio to the best advantages of our surgeons and patients.”
GMK Sphere, launched on the market in 2011, is Medacta’s premier total knee implant. It has been developed with the support of surgeon leaders in the global orthopaedic community and based on the studies of knee anatomy and kinematics by Prof. Michael Freeman and Prof. Vera Pinskerova. GMK Sphere has been designed to deliver maximum functional stability, as well as to restore the natural knee motion, with the goal of increasing patient satisfaction during daily activities and decreasing postoperative knee pain.
This innovative implant has been widely embraced by the orthopaedic community, and it has been chosen by surgeons to be implanted in more than 100,000 patients worldwide. GMK Sphere is supported by a solid education network composed of more than 100 international expert mentors, and its clinical advantages are reported in some of the most important peer-reviewed journals. GMK Sphere has been proven to be consistent with its design intent of providing stability.1,2 Patients implanted with GMK Sphere have shown appreciation for their improved function and quality of life, reporting a higher level of satisfaction when compared to posterior stabilized (PS) and cruciate retaining (CR) knees.3,4 Furthermore, studies complying with the Orthopaedic Data Evaluation Panel (ODEP) recommendations have reported that GMK Sphere can provide considerable pain relief and functional recovery.5 Good clinical results have been achieved when implanting GMK Sphere by means of traditional surgical techniques, such as mechanical alignment (MA), as well as using more personalized approaches, such as Kinematic Alignment (KA).4,6
Over the years, the GMK Sphere’s product offering has been constantly expanded. In addition to standard implants, available in a wide range of sizes, options featuring advanced materials have been recently included in its portfolio. Implants with
SensiTiNTM coating offer a hypoallergenic alternative for specific needs. The MectaGrip coating, which represents Medacta’s solution for cementless applications, has been extended to GMK Sphere femoral components.
Supporting technologies have been developed to make the GMK Sphere users’ experience even more unique, while improving healthcare system sustainability at the same time.
The
MyKnee patient-matched instrument platform provides surgeons with an advanced 3-D preoperative planning tool and patient-specific surgical instrumentation. This platform facilitates an accurate implant positioning and allows for reducing the surgical steps, saving time and costs. To further enhance Medacta’s personalized medicine offering, a proprietary Augmented Reality platform,
NextARTM Knee, has been developed. With the goal of improving accuracy and efficiency in computer-assisted surgery, this innovative platform features advanced planning tools with unique soft tissue assessment, a revolutionary tracking system, and augmented reality to potentially improve surgery accuracy and efficiency associated to GMK Sphere.
1 Schütz, P., Taylor, W.R., Postolka, B., Fucentese, S.F., Koch, P.P., Freeman, M.A., Pinskerova, V. and List, R. (2019), Kinematic Evaluation of the GMK Sphere Implant During Gait Activities: A Dynamic Videofluoroscopy Study, J. Orthop. Res., 37: 2337-2347.
2 Wautier D, Thienpont E., Changes in anteroposterior stability and proprioception after different types of knee arthroplasty, Knee Surg. Sports Traumatol. Arthrosc. 2017 Jun;25(6):1792-1800.
3 Dowsey MM, Gould DJ, Spelman T, Pandy MG, Choong PF., A Randomized Controlled Trial Comparing a Medial Stabilized Total Knee Prosthesis to a Cruciate Retaining and Posterior Stabilized Design: A Report of the Clinical and Functional Outcomes Following Total Knee Replacement., J. Arthroplasty. 2020 Jun;35(6):1583-1590.e2.
4 Scott D., McMahill B., Patient satisfaction and clinical outcomes are better with a medial-stabilized implant versus a posterior-stabilized implant, International Society for Technology in Arthroplasty (ISTA) 31st Annual Congress, London, England, October 2018. Part 2.
5 Samuel Everett, Michael Murray, Irrum Afzal, Catherine Kellett, John Skinner, Gareth Scott, Philippe Van Overschelde, Deiary Kader, Richard Field International, MultiCentre, Prospective, Observational Study Of A New Medial Stability Knee Design “GMK Sphere” 20th EFORT Annual Congress (Lisbon, 2019).
6 Peter F. Choong et al., A Randomized Controlled Trial Comparing a Medial Stabilized Total Knee Prosthesis to a Cruciate Retaining and Posterior Stabilized Design: A Report of the Clinical and Functional Outcomes Following Total Knee Replacement, The Journal of Arthroplasty Jan 2020: 1-8.
