Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Zimmer' started by Anonymous, Mar 2, 2012 at 8:10 PM.
Heads up to the entire orthopedic industry...Watch out! Zimmer's new knee system is Unbelievable!
Yea, and I bet it has years and years of clinical outcome results!!!!! Another marketing success and sales failure.
gosh, another new knee from zimmer. what's wrong with the other 34 knees zimmer makes. zimmer has a winner with this one for sure (wink, wink)
No smoke and mirrors here. I was able to see the system in a private showing at AAOS and it truly will be a "game changer". The knee implant itself combines all of the design features that make the NexGen the #1 selling knee and least revised per registry results, FACT!!!! But the instruments are and will be the most intuitive in the industry bar none with only 3 trays needed!!!
I was in the conference room when 2 competitive, world renowned and industry respected surgeons were just leaving. Apparently discussing the possibility of being a part of the evaluation panel...........lookout Biomet,Depuy. Wink, wink, you may be losing some of your consultants!!!
So rather than a 27% market share in knees Zimmer will probably be in the 35% by 2015, sucks for you guys!!!!!
Except of course the British Joint registry (which has more data than the registries they love to quote combined) . Where it had a 30% higher revision rate than the PFC, and 40% more than Triathlon and Vanguard.
Our surgeons ask about it, and why the figures are so different, they just blame the figures not being put in right (blame the customer!).
As for these well respected surgeons, I wonder how much they will get paid to sit on the panel!? All totally above board, but still doesn't smell right.
yeah you're right, way to spin it. So the Swedish and Australian and to a lesser extent, Italian, Canadian and Netherlands didn't get it right?? Hmmmmm, something doesn't smell right?
Although it is laughable that you mention Vangaurd and Triathlon. Even with very few units implanted, those two systems have alarming revision rates. What's surprising is that these implants are failing because of design flaws; wait until that garbage poly begins to oxidize invivo in 6-8 years!!
Don't like the results? Just Ignore them!
You are so right about something not smelling right. Lets just hope they don't base persona on the Flex!
Once again, ignore the results you don't like, PFC comes out better in the Australian, English, and New Zealand registries, you CAN pick some nice headline figures mostly based on the CR (the lowest selling brand), and compare them to the figures of the competitors combined figures for Cruciate retaining and sacrificing), apples with oranges.
New Zealand Joint Registry (failure per 100 obs yrs):
Triathlon Failure Rate: 0.39
NexGen LPS Flex 0.74, LPS 0.59, CR 0.37, CR Flex 0.56) (average 0.53)
The Australian Joint Registry, Nexgen STILL comes out worse than the PFC.
NexGen (average of CR, CR Flex, LPS, LPS Flex): 0.6
Then you quote the Italian registry which doesn't actually compare the NexGen to the Vanguard or Triathlon, and only about 1,000 PFC's
Averages calculated from actual observed years etc.
Re: Don't like the results? Just Ignore them!
Im looking at page 137 of the Australian 2011 report for cemented knees. (most common)
I read the PFC Sigma MBT at 4.9 and the Sigma at 5.8 Cumulative percent revision.
The NexGen CR is at 2.7 and the LPS is at 4.6.
I then look at the 2011 Swedish report. (page 30) PFC is .83 and Nex Gen is .56. (low score is good)
So, help me out here....which knees system is showing better results at 10 years . BTW, these are the only two registries globally that have hit the 10 year mark.
(the answer is NexGen , by the way !)
Zimmer is DEAD in South Florida, a large market, why? Its because your reputation with ETHICAL physicians is for shit. Combine that with the new Distributor who's old school and will just contiue your wicked ways of old and the flatline will continue....except for those doing "soft" research...
Zimmer must be the only company out there desperately pushing their surgeons change to a design with results that have been clearly proven to give poorer results to their patients!
NexGen Flex 40% higher revision rates than old design!
Again ignore what the registries tell you, some great Headline figures for the OLD NexGen, but the NexGen your surgeons are putting in TODAY is not half as good.
A NexGen patient TODAY is likely to suffer a 40% higher risk of revision than a patient 10 years ago!!!! (p136) as they will get the lovely Flex implant!
The NexGen CR cemented does have great results, but how many of those go in now? (Page 121 of the Aussie registry tells us it was only 117 in 2010), compared to 2,438 LPS flex with that lovely high revision rate!
Lets look at the Swedish Joint Registry too, yes, great HISTORICAL figures based on the old design, but again, Flex is starting to make an impact!! Relative risk of revision :
NICE! Where will it end up!? (up being the operative word! )
Perhaps you could remind us how your surgeons can put in a standard CR or LPS with the much vaunted new instruments...
AnNS: They can't!!
So it's no surprise that the newer registries, where the standard CR and LPS implant is less prevalent, and the figures are combined, the figures are much worse!
Unfortunately either of us CANNOT state if the CR or PS versions of competing products have a higher revision rate than their Zimmer contemporaries as the figures are not available. But the average is lower than the Zimmer average!
They used to love the British results here, when their results started getting worse, their marketing dept started slagging it off.
When the Oz's started separating the results out, they blamed the poor flex results on the low numbers, now they just ignore them.
Watch what happens with Triathlon's results in 10 years with that shit poly and the same goes for Vanguard using compression molded 1st generation poly.
Look at the numerous recalls and negative whitepapers and patellar clunk and the 30% lateral release rate with PFC. Keep spinning rookie!!
Zimmer is dead in South Florida because of piss poor representation. Zimmer has a fantastic product portfolio and one would think a monkey could sell Zimmer. We are all proven wrong as the monkeys can't sell anything. "Ethical" surgeons in SF, now that's funny!!
What do you expect from reps who are the cast offs of SNN? Orange and white Monkeys!
Yeh, the reps say the same thing, great products, crap management.
Amen to that !
Did Zimmer get rid of that femoral box cut, where a size shares the M/L with one size and the A/P with the other? No wonder they have those minus, plus, and women's sizes. It all starts with the box cut.
PFC will look bad for a while because every knee was a mobile bearing, just some more than others. PFC results should improve with the tighter poly constraint initiated 5-6 years ago.
This is an awesome thread. Both sides please keep it going.
I'm a fan of another new system for the company of imitation. My guess is they'll try to come out with something no one has ever though of, like antioxidant poly, half sizes in the femur. Maybe even a ps plus option, or an instrument platform that doesn't make you take a completely extra cut so that your patella actually tracks! Exciting times!