Surgical Technique, EN
Physica ZUK
With proven clinical heritage, optimizing function and precise execution, Physica ZUK is the best performing UKA at 10 & 15 years. Physica ZUK benefits from an unchanged design for more than 20 years. It is the only UKA implant with 15A* ODEP rating.
Proven Clinical Heritage
Best performing UKA at 10 & 15yrs (1) with its unchanged design for more than 15 years is supporting repeatable and reproducible results (2, 3, 4, 5, 6).
Optimizing Function
The fixed bearing design is reducing post-operative complications of bearing dislocation (7), improving functional outcomes and FJS (8).
Precision Execution
Simple and easy-to-use instrument set for fine-tuning preparation and repeatable and reproducible surgical technique. Same implant for Medial and Lateral UKA.
About
Physica ZUK offers an unchanged design for more than 20 years
- Fixed bearing design with metal tibial baseplate + liner (available in UHMWPE or LimaVit) & all-poly tibia options, universal tibial and femoral components for lateral and medial UKA and universal tibial/femoral compatibility.
- Physica ZUK has a PMMA coating on femoral and metal tibial components for advanced cement adhesion.
The design allows for native knee kinematics, reduces risk of overstuffing and reduces post-operative complication of bearing dislocation. With a proven clinical heritage, Physica ZUK delivers reliable performance over time to help achieve superior outcomes in unicompartimental knee arthroplasty. Additionally, Physica ZUK can help surgeons improve efficiency in their daily practice by reducing procedure time and the risk of surgical complications. Its minimally invasive approach supports rapid patient recovery, with an intuitive and easy-to-use instrumentation.
1. Unicompartmenal Knee Consensus on Patient Selection. LimaCorporate SpA, 2020.
2. Unicompartmental Knee Consensus on Surgical Challenges in UKA. A surgeon experience collection. LimaCorporate SpA, 2021.
3. National Joint Registry for England, Wales and Northern Ireland (NJR). Implant Summary Report on Physica ZUK. Hemel Hempstead (UK): NJR Centre. 2025 May.
4. Gill JR et al, “Clinical results and 12-year survivorship of the Physica ZUK unicompartmental knee replacement”, Knee, 2019 Jun;26(3):750-758.
5. Vasso M et al, “Unicompartmental knee arthroplasty is effective: ten year results”, Int Orthop, 2015 Dec;39(12):2341-6.
6. De Grave P et al, “Outcomes of a Fixed-Bearing, Medial, Cemented Unicondylar Knee Arthroplasty Design: Survival Analysis and Functional Score of 460 Cases”, J Arth, 2018 Sep;33(9):2792-2799
7. Biswas D et al “Medial unicompartmental knee arthroplasty in patients less than 55 years old: minimum of two years of follow-up”, J Arth, 2014 Jan;29(1):101-5.
8. R.I.P.O. (Register of the Orthopaedic Prosthetic Implants) Annual report 2024, Istituto Ortopedico Rizzoli, Bologna, Italy.
9. Servien E et al, “Lateral versus medial tibial plateau: morphometric analysis and adaptability with current tibial component design”, KSSTA, 2008 Dec;16(12):1141-5.
10. Kim Tae K et al, “Clinical Results of Lateral Unicompartmental Knee Arthroplasty: Minimum 2-Year Follow-up”, CiOS, 2016 Dec;8(4):386-392.
11. Gill JR et al, “Forgotten Joint Score: Comparison between total and unicondylar knee arthroplasty”, Knee, 2021 Mar;29:26-32.
12. Ohashi KL, Dauskardt RH. Effects of fatigue loading and PMMA precoating on the adhesion and subcritical debonding of prosthetic-PMMA interfaces J Biomed Mater Res. 2000 Aug;51(2):172-83.
13. Data from file: internal survey to surgeons
14. Wilson HA, Middleton R, Abram SGF, Smith S, Alvand A, Jackson WF, Bottomley N, Hopewell S, Price AJ. Patient relevant outcomes of unicompartmental versus total knee replacement: systematic review and meta-analysis. BMJ. 2019 Feb 21;364:l352. doi: 10.1136/bmj.l352. Erratum in: BMJ. 2019 Apr 2;365:l1032. doi: 10.1136/bmj.l1032. PMID: 30792179; PMCID: PMC6383371.
15. Liddle A, Judge A, Pandit H et al., Adverse outcomes after total and unicompartmental knee replacement in 101 330 matched patients: a study of data from the National Joint Registry for England and Wales. The Lancet, 2014; 384, 1437-1445
16. Burn E, Liddle AD, Hamilton TW, Pai S, Pandit HG, Murray DW, Pinedo-Villanueva R. Choosing Between Unicompartmental and Total Knee Replacement: What Can Economic Evaluations Tell Us? A Systematic Review. Pharmacoecon Open. 2017 Dec;1(4):241-253. doi: 10.1007/s41669-017-0017-4. PMID: 29441501; PMCID: PMC5711745.
17. Burnett Iii RA, Yang J, Courtney PM, Terhune EB, Hannon CP, Della Valle CJ. Costs of unicompartmental compared with total knee arthroplasty : a matched cohort study over ten years. Bone Joint J. 2021 Jun;103-B(6 Supple A):23-31. doi: 10.1302/0301-620X.103B6.BJJ-2020-2259.R1. PMID: 34053283.
18. Shankar S, Tetreault MW, Jegier BJ, Andersson GB, Della Valle CJ. A cost comparison of unicompartmental and total knee arthroplasty. Knee. 2016 Dec;23(6):1016-1019. doi: 10.1016/j.knee.2015.11.012. Epub 2016 Oct 31. PMID: 27810433.
19. Bayoumi T, van der List JP, Ruderman LV, Zuiderbaan HA, Kerkhoffs GMMJ, Pearle AD. Successful same-day discharge in 88% of patients after unicompartmental knee arthroplasty: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 2023 Mar;31(3):946-962. doi: 10.1007/s00167-022-07094-0. Epub 20
20. Petrillo, S., Lacagnina, C., Corbella, M., Marullo, M., Bargagliotti, M., Giorgino, R. et al. (2024) One-day surgery is safe and effective in unicompartmental knee arthroplasty: a prospective comparative study at 1 year of follow-up. Knee Surgery, Sports Traumatology, Arthroscopy, 32, 3272–3280. https://doi.org/10.1002/ksa.1235022 Aug 11. PMID: 35951077; PMCID: PMC9366132.
Limacorporate S.p.A. / Mathys Ltd Bettlach, an Enovis Corporation affiliate, as a manufacturer of prosthetic implants, does not practice the medical profession. The choice of the most suitable surgical procedure and technique is the responsibility of the healthcare professional. Each Surgeon must evaluate the appropriateness of the implant technique they intend to perform in light of their own preparation, experience and clinical evaluation of each individual Patient.
This video is provided for the exclusive use of healthcare professionals. All rights to the content of the video are reserved pursuant to applicable law. Reproduction, publication and distribution by third parties are expressly prohibited without permission.
Fixed-Bearing with LimaVit (Vit-E enriched UHMWPE) insert
Fixed-Bearing with all-poly tibial component
Fixed-bearing with UHMWPE insert
Sizing and Options
7 Femoral sizes Universal femoral component (Right Medial = Left Lateral)
Femur pre-coated with PMMA
6 Tibial sizes Metal or all-poly
tibial baseplate options
Metal tibial baseplate pre-coated with PMMA
All poly tibial component available in 6 different thicknesses
6 Liner sizes Fixed-Bearing
6 Thicknesses
UHMWPE or LimaVit (Vit-E cross-linked PE) for metal-back solution options
Clinical Papers
Resources
Surgical Technique
Clinical Brochure, EN
Clinical Brochure, EN
Clinical Brochure, EN
Clinical Brochure, EN
Flyer, EN
Clinical Results, EN
Surgical Technique, EN
Surgical Technique, EN
Product manufactured by Limacorporate S.p.A.
Please note that not all products are available and registered in every market. Please contact your Enovis’ Sales Representative for any further information.
Mathys Ltd Bettlach and Limacorporate S.p.A. are affiliates of Enovis Corporation.
Please note that the doctors/surgeons appearing in the Physica ZUK - The UNI-que knee: heritage, benefits and testimonies in this page receive compensation from Limacorporate or Mathys (affiliates of Enovis Corporation) under contract for advisory services in relation to Limacorporate, Mathys and Enovis’ medical products. Such services do not include the promotion of any Lima, Mathys and Enovis product.
Contact us
Get in touch with us by filling out the form below.