
Learn the Total knee replacement Genesis 2 (PS) with bi-convex patella (Smith and Nephew) surgical technique with step by step instructions on OrthOracle. Our e-learning platform contains high resolution images and a certified CME of the Total knee replacement Genesis 2 (PS) with bi-convex patella (Smith and Nephew) surgical procedure.
The Genesis II knee replacement is a popular bicondylar TKR design which has a proven track record. Dating from the mid 1990s, the Gen II was designed by James Rand, Bob Bourne and Richard Laskin, to incorporate a number of specific design features to optimise performance.
The key benefits of the Genesis II are:
Asymmetric posterior femoral condyles – the medial posterior condyle was reduced from 9.5mm to 7mm thick to create an ‘external rotation’ of the femoral component relative to the tibia, without changing the trochlea position by physically rotating the component externally relative to the femoral bone. This improves femorotibial contact geometry throughout range as well as optimising patella tracking.
The coronal geometry is rounded at its edges to improve femoro-tibial contact further and also reducing edge loading which subsequently reduces wear.
The trochlea groove is sigmoid shaped to allow the patella to be ‘met’ by the femoral component laterally and as the patella medialises on its journey to the tibial tubercle, it is supported underneath by the trochlea of the femoral component.
The tibial baseplate is asymmetric to optimise tibial coverage for improved sizing and fixation, thus allowing transfer of load through the whole tibial plateau.
The tibial stem is offset medially from the centre of the tibial component to mirror the native anatomic metaphyseal – diaphyseal mismatch of most patients, which on average is 3mm.
The Genesis II system was introduced with Cruciate retaining, quickly adding posterior stabilised and there are both uncemented and cemented options
The Genesis II is available with Cobalt Chrome or Oxinium Femoral components; the Oxinium bearing surface has been shown to reduce where rates in vitro and be clinically safe at 10 years in patients.
Polyethylene tibial liners are available in standard or highly crosslinked forms (Ultra High Molecular Weight Polyethylene), although the high flexion liner is only available in UHMWPE.
In terms of which variant of Genesis II to choose, I have settled on cemented fixed bearing posterior stabilised with cobalt chrome femoral components for ‘standard’ TKRs. I will always try and perform a partial knee replacement if possible, but once I have made the decision that the whole joint is involved I chose to resurface the patella in all patients. For this I choose the biconvex inset Genesis patella as this allows careful fine tuning of patella construct thickness as described in this operation technique and also the Orthoracle technique Smith and Nephew Journey patello-femoral replacement .
The Biconvex Inset Patella has a 2.3% revision rate at 10 years according to Erak et al; they found that in a series of 521 inset patellae, in 431 patients, there were 14 revisions at 10 years which equates to a 2.7% revision rate. However in the same study at 10 years post implantation, in non-revised patients, there was only a 7.8% incidence of anterior knee pain which is a very low level.
In younger higher demand patients I use the Oxinium femoral component with UMWPE High Flex polyethylene liners; the age bracket for change is around 60-65 years of age in my opinion but this is more dependant on biological age, weight and function of the patient.

INDICATIONS
As with any other TKR system – knee arthritis from any cause.
SYMPTOMS & EXAMINATION
History
Patients complain of generalised pain in the knee, effecting more than one compartment, either medial, lateral or patellofemoral. This is made worse by periods of inability and patients often complain of stiffness on starting activities (‘startup pain’) or early in the morning. Activities which load the affected compartment of the knee joint will be more painful with post-activity swelling and stiffness. Classic aggravating activities include stairs (both ascent and descent but often with descent as the most problematic), squatting and kneeling, getting out of chairs, getting into a car. In general pain is associated with load-bearing, but often improves once an activity starts, until the maximal tolerance is reached. Usually extra load-bearing is associated with delayed swelling and stiffness; the patient often complains that ‘they pay for doing more’ on their arthritic knees. There is often a reduced range of movement which patients notice as restricting certain activities for example cycling or getting out of a chair
In this particular case the patient was a lady in her 60s’ who had previously had a left Genesis II PS TKA 2 years previously for medial grade IV disease with patella-femoral moderate wear. She had made a good recovery from the left TKA and was back at work as a nursery nurse, but unfortunately the right knee arthritis had become too intrusive in her daily life and was effecting her sleep, despite adequate analgesia.
Examination
The examination should start with an assessment of walking followed by a Trendelenberg test and an attempt at squatting. There is classically an antalgic gate if there is a unilateral disease or a stiff knee gate with bilateral disease. Frequently there is proximal muscle weakness/poor gluteal recruitment which may be assessed during gait pattern or on a Trendelenberg test. Personally I prefer to perform a Trendelenberg test (in this patient group) by asking patients to place their hands on the hips over the Iliac crests then, standing on one leg at a time, I obsere pelvic tilt by inequality of hand position. If the abductors are weak in the standing leg then the opposite hand will drop down, and the patient will lean to the weak side to restore balance. During squat testing there is usually audible crepitus and the patient will be unable to proceed due to pain. Frequently patients will lean to their favourite(least painful) side indicating which joint is most symptomatic.
Sitting examination is very useful to demonstrate patellofemoral height and tracking. In this position it is also prudent to rotate the hip to exclude any referred pain from the hip joint. Palpate for crepitus (during knee flexion) in the patellofemoral joint (PFJ).
Supine examination should then be performed to detect effusion, Range of motion, localised areas of tenderness usually in the affected compartments (for example in the medial and PFJ) and irritability of the PFJ on compression testing – Clarks test. Caution is required here as this is often painful; I would suggest gently positioning the patella into the trochlea groove passively and should this be painful stopping the test at that stage, quadriceps activation only being required if the initial test is negative.
In this particular case there was tenderness in the right knee medial tibiofemoral and lateral patellofemoral joint and an intact ACL. The range of movement was from 0-120 degrees. The patella was very irritable on Clark’s testing.
IMAGING
Plain x-rays including alignment views particularly looking for excessive mal-alignment due to bone loss, skyline x-rays (if no MRI), weight-bearing laterals and Rosenberg views should be performed both to demonstrate the extent of arthritis with complete loss of joint space in at least one compartment, but also to exclude any significant bone loss or excessive posterior osteophytes which would be useful to know for surgical planning.
MRI scan may be required to demonstrate areas of full thickness loss if this is not visible on plain radiographs. In this case I requested an MRI to assess the state of the lateral PFJ which appeared irritable on clinical examination, but was not showing signs of significant PFJ disease on Radiograph; of the PFJ was not involved then this lady would be suitable for a medial partial knee replacement such as an Oxford uncemented mobile bearing (see Orthoracle link) or a Zimmer-Biomet Persona Partial Knee Replacement (Medial).
ALTERNATIVE OPERATIVE TREATMENT
Given the bi-compartmental full thickness change this is beyond partial knee replacement although in occasional cases, bi-compartmental replacement of both PFJ and a tibiofemoral compartment may be considered. Similarly in specific cases there may be an indication to retain both cruciates and preserve proximal tibial bone stock by using a bicruciate retaining TKR such as the Total knee replacement: Vanguard XP cruciate retaining (Zimmer-Biomet) or the Smith and Nephew Journey II XR (which is not yet released in the UK). As this lady had previously had a successful Genesis II PS on the left knee two years previously, both the patient and I were keen to perform identical implant surgery on the right knee.
I would not consider osteotomy in this case given the combination of medial tibia-femoral OA with lateral PFJ OA; if a medial opening wedge tibial osteotomy were to be performed, then the PFJ forces would increase on the lateral (damaged) side of her PFJ.
Total knee replacement is the standard treatment of end-stage knee arthritis. Standard PCL retaining or PCL substituting TKR has a wealth of data to support its use. I have used the Genesis II since 2007, initially I chose PCL retaining, but from 2010 I moved to posterior stabilised implants for the majority of total knee cases. My reasoning for choice of constraint with a posterior stabilised design was to improve flexion range, minimise instability and reduce PFJ overload by reducing PFJ forces.
NON-OPERATIVE MANAGEMENT
Like all arthroplasty, non-operative treatment must be exhausted before proceeding to replacement. Careful physiotherapy assessment, gait re-education where appropriate and strengthening should be performed. Consideration of shock absorbing insoles and walking aids as well as standard analgesic treatments. Consideration of hyaluronic acid injections and/or steroid injections should also be considered. Newer injection therapies such as fat-derived or platelet-derived therapeutic injections should still be considered in their early stages of assessment.
CONTRAINDICATIONS
General absolute contraindications include active infection and medical comorbidities precluding arthroplasty as well as the absence of full thickness chondral disease.
Inability to consent to TKR, unless there is a traumatic aetiology in a patient without such capacity to consent.

The operative table should be placed with the head of the patient on the outline of the laminar flow. This ensures sufficient space within the laminar flow for all the operative sets.
The set-up position is identical to any total knee replacement with a side support and foot roll. Patient warming may be achieved by warmed under blanket or hot air surrounding blanket, however caution must be observed during application of a forced air warming device to ensure that there is no leak of air over the operative site. Instead the leak of hot air should be from the head end and outside of the laminar flow zone.

POST OPERATIVELY
Antibiotics: 24 hours prophylaxis – we used Flucloxacillin 1000mg x 3 postoperatively, in addition to the induction Flucloxacillin and Gentamycin on induction. The remaining doses (of the 24 hour schedule) on patient discharge are given orally as take-away medication. However we have changed our department protocol since this operation and now we use a once only preoperative Ceftriaxone which ensures there are no missed doses post-operatively!
Overnight stay or day case surgery.
Weight Bearing: full weight bear as soon as possible.
Bloods: Haemocue in recovery for daycare or following day for in-patients.
Radiograph: Anteroposterior and lateral XR
Dressing: Bulky wool compression bandage reduced at 12 hours and replaced with a single tubigrip.
Dressing: occlusive dressing left in situ for 2 weeks, ideally undisturbed from theatre, but changed on the rare occasions that the wound leaks.
Where a LIA suffuser is used this is kept for 36-48 hours then removed on the ward.
Venous thromboembolism prophylaxis: Aspirin 150mg for 6 weeks orally for standard risk. Patients with previous VTE receive 10 days of low molecular weight heparin (LMWH) in addition to their Aspirin. Patients on prophylactic long term anticoagulants including NOACs should simply return to their normal medication on day 2, using LMWH at prophylactic dose on day 1.
Follow-up – depending on the patient’s functional ability we usually ask them to remove their own dressing at 2 weeks, but where this is impractical we review in our outpatient department at 2 weeks. Subsequent review is scheduled as: 6-8 weeks, 12 months, 2 years, 7, 10,13 years continuing every 3 years as per UK National Guidance
Variance – Any concerns with the wound should trigger a review by the treating surgical team and must not be managed in the community.

I have listed four key papers for long-term Genesis II results below in addition to referencing the National Joint Registry (https://reports.njrcentre.org.uk) whose 16th Annual Report has been used to quote the revision rates below for the Genesis II:
10 year revision rate of Gen II = 3.15%.
15 year revision rate of Gen II = 3.45%
When this is subdivided for PS Fixed bearing cemented Gen II then 10 year revision rate = 3.97% and at 13 years = 4.67%
Quadriceps Force in Relation of Intrinsic Anteroposterior Stability of TKA Design. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg. 2010 Jan;130(1):1-9.
Thomas Jan Heyse, Christoph Becher, Nadine Kron, Sven Ostermeier, Christof Hurschler, Markus D Schofer, Susanne Fuchs-Winkelmann, Carsten O Tibesku
The Role of Polyethylene Design on Postoperative TKA Flexion: An Analysis of 1534 Cases. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2010 Jan;468(1):108-14.
Richard W McCalden, Steven J MacDonald, Kory D J Charron, Robert B Bourne, Douglas D Naudie
Clinical Results and Survivorship of the GENESIS II Total Knee Arthroplasty at a Minimum of 15 Years. J Arthroplasty. 2017 Jul;32(7):2161-2166.
Richard W McCalden, Gavin P Hart, Steven J MacDonald, Douglas D Naudie, James H Howard, Robert B Bourne
Ten-year results of an inset biconvex patella prosthesis in primary knee arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2009 Jul;467(7):1781-92.
Erak S, Rajgopal V, Macdonald SJ, McCalden RW, Bourne RB.
The paper below is a general review of longevity following total knee arthroplasty:
How long does a knee replacement last? A systematic review and meta-analysis of case series and national registry reports with more than 15 years of follow-up.Lancet. 2019 Feb 16;393(10172):655-663.
Evans JT, Walker RW, Evans JP, Blom AW, Sayers A, Whitehouse MR
Reference
- orthoracle.com























































































































