Please explain, wonder if your patients know this FACT?



Stop the bickering! We are talking about the lives of human beings! Human beings that are hurting. Feel THEIR pain. Step in THEIR shoes. Let's help the people out there. People who need people, as Barbara once sang.
 
Just before cementing, or pressfitting, every surgeon does a range of motion trial. Some surgeons, and we all have worked with them, will accept a tight knee instead of taking the extra time to go back and make soft tissue adjustments or take more bone, either distally or proximally.

So, are the patient specific implants to blame, the off the shelf implants or the surgeon to blame?

Its ok to ask tough questions, if you can accept the tough answers.
 
Classic case of expecting a PS oriented surgeon to manage a CR technique and the need to make sure the PCL is not chronically encapsulated or requiring the normal standard release before or after the tibial resection.
 
So the conformis response to high manipulation rate is to blame the surgeon. That sounds like a winner. The technology is interesting and good for marketing. That doesn't mean that it will perform as advertised. "Off the shelf" implants have proven track records, proven instruments, and the new ones have more than enough sizing options to fit all patients.

Most normal knees have a medial pivot during normal activities. There are some activities where they don't pivot. ACL deficient knees display a lateral pivot during a lot of normal activities.
 
So the conformis response to high manipulation rate is to blame the surgeon. That sounds like a winner. The technology is interesting and good for marketing. That doesn't mean that it will perform as advertised. "Off the shelf" implants have proven track records, proven instruments, and the new ones have more than enough sizing options to fit all patients.

Most normal knees have a medial pivot during normal activities. There are some activities where they don't pivot. ACL deficient knees display a lateral pivot during a lot of normal activities.

I don't think ConforMIS is saying it is surgeon error...some posters are. They could be right, they could be wrong. I have seen plenty of MUA's and full blown revisions on Zimmer, Stryker, Biomet, and DePuy knees. I don't think anyone with an objective thought process thinks those knee implants alone are fully to blame...it is usually surgeon error that is leading to that stuff. *Childish and petty "knowledge drops" on patella clunk, post jumping, mid flex instability and so on can be checked at the door....all the big company OTS knees are good - not perfect - but more than adequate for 95% of the patient population that wants to get from Point A to Point B with less pain than they had before their OA/RA became progressively intolerable.

If you want to blame ConforMIS for something, maybe their reps are not being as selective as they should in their surgeon targets? If they are getting any old MD or DO to do the knee because they are telling them it is error proof, then they are being unethical as a rep. We all know there are docs that should not be doing knees, but do them anyway. This isn't the panacea for people that shouldn't be cutting a distal femur in the first place.
 
So what do all of you guys think about the kss patient satisfaction rates going through the roof in all of these large studies Conformis is putting out? I'm hearing about a large amount of surgeons converting to this system now that credibility has been built.
 
You can post any study you want, the beauty is there will always be another study that someone can find that directly contradicts your point. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27249110
Also using that study to validate Conformis improving patient outcomes is laighable, because one I can guarantee you that is not a study done by Conformis, but done by one of the big five in ortho whom have PSI instruments. Main reason for this was they used MRI to make the instruments. One of the main claims from Conformis and many other thought leaders is that MRI is a great fluid based visual application but horrible for developing instruments that need to be based off of subchondral bone.
Just don't go on the internet and paste some dumb link touting psi is amazing. Understand the article and attempt to understand the correlation of that article to your argument.
 


Write your reply...