Designed by surgeons for surgeons, the ROSA® Knee System provides objective soft tissue feedback and accurate bone resections, which aim to restore a patient’s natural knee. ROSA Knee collects intra-operative metrics to inform your decision-making and provide data-driven insights, so you can focus on achieving the optimal outcome for each patient.
Intended for Healthcare Professionals
ROSA® Knee System: Robotic Knee Replacement
Predictive Planning, Precise Performance
Features and Benefits
Surgeon-Centered
You’re in the Driver’s Seat
Maintain your current
approach and surgical technique, including Personalized Alignment™.
Quantify Previously Subjective Information
Objectively
measure soft tissue and predictively plan a balanced knee replacement
before performing any resections.
Easy to Integrate with Minimal Learning Curve1,2
Offering an Enhanced TKA Surgical Experience
TKA with
robotic surgical assistance results in less physician stress and
strain than conventional methods.3
Implants Designed to Improve Outcomes
Technologies are only as good as the implants they are used
with. ROSA Knee supports our leading knee brand: Persona®
The Personalized Knee®4-9, including the Persona® OsseoTi® Keel Tibia.
Accurate
Delivers Highly Accurate Resections and Limb Alignment10
A recent in vivo study reported that:
- The average difference between the planned and executed resections for all measurements was <1° and <1 mm with standard deviations <1 for each.
- The average difference between planned and executed hip-knee-ankle (HKA) angle was 1.2° ± 1.1°.
Improved Precision and Accuracy Versus Conventional
Instrumentation11
In a prior cadaveric study
comparing conventional versus robotic instrumentation, 25% of knees
were outside of ± 3° of the planned alignment when conventional
instrumentation was used. However, all robotic cases using ROSA Knee
were within ± 3° of planned alignment.
Efficient
Flexible Imaging Options
Offers both image-based and
imageless options for greater flexibility. While some surgeons opt for
the operational efficiency of working imageless, others appreciate the
benefits of utilizing image-based cases with X-Atlas® 2D to
3D Technology.
Data-Driven
Making the best decision when it matters requires data-driven
intelligence.
A cornerstone of ZBEdge™
Dynamic Intelligence™, with the power to elevate
and unlock the full potential of Zimmer Biomet’s cutting-edge suite of
integrated digital technologies, robotics and implant solutions.
ROSA MedEd Events
ROSAdvantage Warranty†Program
Making the decision to get a knee replacement isn’t easy, but we believe by showing patients that Zimmer Biomet stands behind the products in the ROSA®dvantage program and the surgeons who use the products, they will be a little more at ease.
ROSA Knee Events
ROSA Introductory BioSkills Event
Up Next: May 15, 2022
One full day cadaveric experience in preparation for live cases. Event will consist of didactive presentations, sawbone based demonstrations, and a cadaveric specimen for each participating surgeon.
ROSAdvantage Warranty† Program
Making the decision to get a knee replacement isn’t easy, but we believe by showing patients that Zimmer Biomet stands behind the products in the ROSA®dvantage program and the surgeons who use the products, they will be a little more at ease.
ROSAdvantage Warranty† Program
Making the decision to get a knee replacement isn’t easy, but we believe by showing patients that Zimmer Biomet stands behind the products in the ROSA®dvantage program and the surgeons who use the products, they will be a little more at ease.
SUBMIT YOUR INFORMATION AND GET CONTACTED BY A ZIMMER BIOMET REP
Disclaimer
All content herein is protected by copyright, trademarks and other intellectual property rights, as applicable, owned by or licensed to Zimmer Biomet or its affiliates unless otherwise indicated, and must not be redistributed, duplicated or disclosed, in whole or in part, without the express written consent of Zimmer Biomet.
This material is intended for health care professionals. Distribution to any other recipient is prohibited.
For product information, including indications, contraindications, warnings, precautions, potential adverse effects and patient counseling information, see the package insert and information on this website. To obtain a copy of the current Instructions for Use (IFU) for full prescribing and risk information, please call 1-800-348-2759, press 4 for 411 Technical Support.
For additional robotic inquiries and concerns, contact 1-855 ROSA BOT.
- Vanlommel L, Neven E, Anderson MB, Bruckers L, Truijen J. The initial learning curve for the ROSA(R) Knee System can be achieved in 6-11 cases for operative time and has similar 90-day complication rates with improved implant alignment compared to manual instrumentation in total knee arthroplasty. J Exp Orthop 2021; 8(1): 119.
- Bolam SM, Tay ML, Zaidi F, et al. Introduction of ROSA robotic-arm system for total knee arthroplasty is associated with a minimal learning curve for operative time. Journal of Experimental Orthopaedics. 2022;9(1):86.
- Haffar A, Krueger CA, Goh GS, Lonner JH. Total Knee Arthroplasty With Robotic Surgical Assistance Results in Less Physician Stress and Strain Than Conventional Methods. The Journal of Arthroplasty 2022. *A Zimmer Biomet funded study
- Zhang, Y., et al. Interfacial Frictional Behavior: Cancellous Bone, Cortical Bone, and a Novel Porous Tantalum Biomaterial. Journal of Musculoskeletal Research. 3(4):, 245-251, 1999.
- Bobyn, J.D., et al. Characteristics of Bone In-growth and Interface Mechanics of a New Porous Tantalum Biomaterial. Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery (British). 81-B(5): 907, 1999.
- Shirazi-Adl, A., et al. Experimental Determination of Friction Characteristics at the Trabecular Bone / Porous-coated Metal Interface in Cementless Implants. The Journal of Biomedical Research. 27: 167- 175, 1993.
- Levine, B. et al. Experimental and Clinical Performance of Porous Metal Tantalum in Orthopedic Surgery. Biomaterials. 27: 4671-81, 2006.
- Zimmer ZRR_WA_2537_12.
- Statement based on: 5 million
implantations9h 300+ Publications9g 100%
Survivorship at 17 Years9a Lowest revision
rate9b-e Benchmark for PROMs9f 10A* ODEP
rating for CR and PS knees both with and without
patella9g Every 90 seconds a patient receives a NexGen
knee9h 1 in 5 knees implanted globally is a NexGen
Knee9i
9a. Kim, Y.H., et al. Cementless and cemented total knee arthroplasty in patients younger than fifty-five years. Which is better? International Orthopaedics (SICOT) (2014) 38:297–303.
9b. Australian Orthopaedic Association National Joint Replacement Registry. Annual Report. Adelaide.AOA 2016: Table KT9 Cumulative Percent Revision of Primary Total Knee Replacement with Cement Fixation.
9c. Australian Orthopaedic Association National Joint Replacement Registry. Annual Report. Adelaide.AOA 2016: Table KT10 Cumulative Percent Revision of Primary Total Knee Replacement with Cementless Fixation.
9d. Australian Orthopaedic Association National Joint Replacement Registry. Annual Report. Adelaide. AOA 2016: Table KT11 Cumulative Percent Revision of Primary Total Knee Replacement with Hybrid Fixation.
9e. Select variants from the 2016 Swedish National Registry available at http://myknee.se/en/ (pgs 42-43).
9f. Baker, P.N., et al. The effect of surgical factors on early patient reported outcome measures (PROMs) following total knee replacement. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 94:1058, 2012.
9g. Latest ODEP ratings can be found at http://www.odep.org.uk.
9h. 2015 Sales data available at Zimmer Biomet.
9i. EMBASE search: «NexGen» AND «Knee». - Rossi SMP, Sangaletti R, Perticarini L, Terragnoli F, Benazzo F. High accuracy of a new robotically assisted technique for total knee arthroplasty: an in vivo study. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 2022 Jan 4:1–9. doi: 10.1007/s00167-021-06800-8. Epub ahead of print. PMID: 34981162; PMCID: PMC8723813.
- Seidenstein A, Birmingham M, Foran J, Ogden S., Better accuracy and reproducibility of a new robotically-assisted system for total knee arthroplasty compared to conventional instrumentation: a cadaveric study. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 2020 Mar;29(3):859-866. doi: 10.1007/s00167-020-06038-w. Epub 2020 May 24. PMID: 32448945.
- Zhang, Y., et al. Interfacial Frictional Behavior: Cancellous Bone, Cortical Bone, and a Novel Porous Tantalum Biomaterial. Journal of Musculoskeletal Research. 3(4):, 245-251, 1999.
- Bobyn, J.D., et al. Characteristics of Bone In-growth and Interface Mechanics of a New Porous Tantalum Biomaterial. Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery (British). 81-B(5): 907, 1999.
- Shirazi-Adl, A., et al. Experimental Determination of Friction Characteristics at the Trabecular Bone / Porous-coated Metal Interface in Cementless Implants. The Journal of Biomedical Research. 27: 167- 175, 1993.
- Levine, B. et al. Experimental and Clinical Performance of Porous Metal Tantalum in Orthopedic Surgery. Biomaterials. 27: 4671-81, 2006.
- Zimmer ZRR_WA_2537_12.
- Internal Persona Knee Cumulative Sales Report – Sales Globally as of May 2019.
- Statement based on: 5 million implantations7h 300+ Publications7g 100% Survivorship at 17 Years Lowest revision rate7b-e Benchmark for PROMs7f 10A* ODEP rating for CR and PS knees both with and without patella7g Every 90 seconds a patient receives a NexGen knee7h 1 in 5 knees implanted globally is a NexGen Knee7i 7a. Kim, Y.H., et al. Cementless and cemented total knee arthroplasty in patients younger than fifty five years. Which is better? International Orthopaedics (SICOT) (2014) 38:297–303. 7b. Australian Orthopaedic Association National Joint Replacement Registry. Annual Report. Adelaide.AOA 2016: Table KT9 Cumulative Percent Revision of Primary Total Knee Replacement with Cement Fixation. 7c. Australian Orthopaedic Association National Joint Replacement Registry. Annual Report. Adelaide.AOA 2016: Table KT10 Cumulative Percent Revision of Primary Total Knee Replacement with Cementless Fixation. 7d. Australian Orthopaedic Association National Joint Replacement Registry. Annual Report. Adelaide. AOA 2016: Table KT11 Cumulative Percent Revision of Primary Total Knee Replacement with Hybrid Fixation. 7e. Select variants from the 2016 Swedish National Registry available at http://myknee.se/en/ (pgs 42-43). 7f. Baker, P.N., et al. The effect of surgical factors on early patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) following total knee replacement. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 94:1058, 2012. 7g. Latest ODEP ratings can be found at http://www.odep. org.uk. 7h. 2015 Sales data available at Zimmer Biomet. 7i. EMBASE search: «NexGen» AND «Knee».
- Seidenstein A, Birmingham M, Foran J, Ogden S. Better accuracy and reproducibility of a new robotically-assisted system for total knee arthroplasty compared to conventional instrumentation: a cadaveric study. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 2020 May 24. doi: 1007/s00167-020- 06038-w. Epub ahead of print. PMID: 32448945. Cadaveric testing is not necessarily indicative of clinical performance
- Parratte, S., et al. Instability After Total Knee
Arthroplasty. Journal of Bone Joint Surgery (America). 90(1): 184,
2008. Cadaveric testing is not necessarily indicative of clinical
performance.