Distal femoral knee prostheses

Description

BACKGROUND

1. Field of the Invention

The present invention relates generally to orthopedic prosthetic devices and, in particular, to distal femoral knee prostheses.

2. Description of the Related Art

Disease and trauma affecting the articular surfaces of a knee joint are commonly effectively treated by surgically replacing the articulating ends of the femur and tibia with prosthetic femoral and tibial implants or prostheses according to a procedure known as a total knee replacement (“TKR”) or a total knee arthroplasty (“TKA”). The femoral and tibial implants are made of materials that exhibit a low coefficient of friction as they articulate against one another to restore normal knee function.

Although distal femoral knee prostheses are provided in a range of varying sizes and are selected by surgeons to best fit the anatomy of a particular patient, improvements in the design of distal femoral knee prostheses are desired.

SUMMARY

The present invention provides a set of distal femoral knee prostheses which are designed to be more narrow in medial/lateral (“M/L”) dimensions with increasing anterior/posterior (“A/P”) size than existing prostheses to more closely correspond to the physical anatomy of female patients. The prostheses are designed to have a substantially trapezoidal shape or profile when viewed distally which features a more pronounced narrowing of the M/L dimensions beginning at the posterior end of the prostheses and progressing anteriorly to the anterior end of the prostheses. Additionally, the prostheses each include a reduced profile patellar sulcus and reduced profile anterior condyles to more closely conform to the anatomy of a resected femur, and also include sulcus tracking which is optimized to conform to female anatomy.

In one form thereof, the present disclosure provides a set of distal femoral prostheses particularly adapted for female anatomy, each femoral prosthesis including a distal nonarticulating surface having an anterior end and a posterior end, including a plurality of standard aspect ratio prostheses respectively having increasingly greater overall anterior/posterior dimensions defined between points located most anteriorly and most posteriorly on each prosthesis and having increasingly greater distal taper angles defined between a lateral line connecting the anterior end and the posterior end of the distal nonarticulating surface and a medial line connecting the anterior end and the posterior end of the distal nonarticulating surface on each prosthesis; at least some of the prostheses having a distal taper angle greater than or equal to approximately 21°.

In another form thereof, the present disclosure provides a set of distal femoral prostheses particularly adapted for female anatomy, each femoral prosthesis including a distal nonarticulating surface having an anterior end and a posterior end, including a plurality of standard aspect ratio prostheses each having an overall anterior/posterior dimension defined between points located most anteriorly and most posteriorly on each prosthesis and a medial/lateral dimension defined between points located most medially and most laterally at anterior/posterior locations substantially equidistant from the anterior end of the distal nonarticulating surface and the posterior end of the distal nonarticulating surface; at least some of the prostheses having an overall anterior/posterior dimension and a medial/lateral dimension falling below a conceptual boundary defined by a line connecting a first point and a second point, the first point having an approximately 52.0 overall anterior/posterior dimension and an approximately 55.0 medial/lateral dimension, and the second point having an approximately 77.0 overall anterior/posterior dimension and an approximately 78.5 medial/lateral dimension; wherein the line is defined by the following equation: (medial/lateral dimension)=(0.94*overall anterior/posterior dimension)+6.12.

In yet another form thereof, the present disclosure provides a set of distal femoral prostheses particularly adapted for female anatomy, each femoral prosthesis including a distal nonarticulating surface having an anterior end and a posterior end, including a plurality of standard aspect ratio prostheses respectively having increasingly greater overall anterior/posterior dimensions defined between points located most anteriorly and most posteriorly on each prosthesis and respectively having increasingly greater medial/lateral dimensions defined between points located most medially and most laterally at an anterior/posterior location defined by the anterior end of the distal nonarticulating surface on each prosthesis; at least some of the prostheses having an overall anterior/posterior dimension and a medial/lateral dimension falling below a conceptual boundary defined by a line connecting a first point and a second point, the first point having an approximately 52.0 overall anterior/posterior dimension and an approximately 50.0 medial/lateral dimension, and the second point having an approximately 77.0 overall anterior/posterior dimension and an approximately 70.5 medial/lateral dimension; wherein the line is defined by the following equation: (medial/lateral dimension)=(0.82*overall anterior/posterior dimension)+7.36.

In still another form thereof, the present disclosure provides a set of distal femoral prostheses particularly adapted for female anatomy, each femoral prosthesis including a distal nonarticulating surface and an anterior nonarticulating surface, including a plurality of standard aspect ratio prostheses respectively having increasingly greater overall anterior/posterior dimensions defined between points located most anteriorly and most posteriorly on each prosthesis and respectively having increasingly greater medial/lateral dimensions defined between points located most medially and most laterally at an anterior/posterior location defined by a distal most point on the anterior nonarticulating surface on each prosthesis; at least some of the prostheses having an overall anterior/posterior dimension and a medial/lateral dimension falling below a conceptual boundary defined by a line connecting a first point and a second point, the first point having an approximately 52.0 overall anterior/posterior dimension and an approximately 40.1 medial/lateral dimension, and the second point having an approximately 77.0 overall anterior/posterior dimension and an approximately 53.5 medial/lateral dimension; wherein the line is defined by the following equation: (medial/lateral dimension)=(0.54*overall anterior/posterior dimension)+12.23.

In another form thereof, the present disclosure provides a set of distal femoral prostheses particularly adapted for female anatomy, each femoral prosthesis including a distal nonarticulating surface and an anterior nonarticulating surface, including a plurality of prostheses respectively having increasingly greater overall anterior/posterior dimensions defined between points located most anteriorly and most posteriorly on each prosthesis and respectively having increasingly greater medial/lateral dimensions defined between points located most medially and most laterally at an anterior/posterior location defined by a distal most point on the anterior nonarticulating surface on each prosthesis; at least some of the prostheses having an overall anterior/posterior dimension and a medial/lateral dimension falling below a conceptual boundary defined by a line connecting a first point and a second point, the first point having an approximately 52.0 overall anterior/posterior dimension and an approximately 40.3 medial/lateral dimension, and the second point having an approximately 77.0 overall anterior/posterior dimension and an approximately 51.8 medial/lateral dimension; wherein the line is defined by the following equation: (medial/lateral dimension)=(0.46*overall anterior/posterior dimension)+16.38.

In a still further form thereof, the present disclosure provides a set of distal femoral prostheses particularly adapted for female anatomy, each femoral prosthesis including a distal nonarticulating surface having an anterior end and a posterior end, including a plurality of prostheses each having an overall anterior/posterior dimension defined between points located most anteriorly and most posteriorly on each prosthesis and a medial/lateral dimension defined between points located most medially and most laterally at anterior/posterior locations substantially equidistant from the anterior end of the distal nonarticulating surface and the posterior end of the distal nonarticulating surface; at least some of the overall anterior/posterior dimensions and the medial/lateral dimensions falling within a conceptual boundary defined by an upper line and a lower line, the upper line connecting a first point and a third point, the lower line connecting a second point and a fourth point, the first point having an approximately 52.0 overall anterior/posterior dimension and an approximately 55.0 medial/lateral dimension, the second point having an approximately 52.0 overall anterior/posterior dimension and an approximately 47.0 medial/lateral dimension, the third point having an approximately 77.0 overall anterior/posterior dimension and an approximately 78.5 medial/lateral dimension, and the fourth point having an approximately 77.0 overall anterior/posterior dimension and an approximately 70.0 medial/lateral dimension; wherein the upper line is defined by the following equation: (medial/lateral dimension)=(0.94*overall anterior/posterior dimension)+6.12; and wherein the lower line is defined by the following equation: (medial/lateral dimension)=(0.92*overall anterior/posterior dimension)−0.84.

In a further form thereof, the present disclosure provides a set of distal femoral prostheses particularly adapted for female anatomy, including a plurality of standard aspect ratio prostheses respectively having increasingly greater overall anterior/posterior dimensions defined between points located most anteriorly and most posteriorly on each prosthesis and having increasingly greater medial/lateral dimensions defined between points located most medially and most laterally at an anterior/posterior location defined at a location proximate the most posteriorly located point on each prosthesis; the medial/lateral dimensions of the prostheses respectively increasing at a first rate, the overall anterior/posterior dimensions respectively increasing at a second rate, the first rate and the second rate defining a ratio substantially equal to or less than 0.96.

In another form thereof, the present disclosure provides a set of distal femoral prostheses particularly adapted for female anatomy, including a plurality of prostheses respectively having increasingly greater overall anterior/posterior dimensions defined between points located most anteriorly and most posteriorly on each prosthesis and having increasingly greater medial/lateral dimensions defined between points located most medially and most laterally at an anterior/posterior location defined at a location proximate the most posteriorly located point on each prosthesis; the medial/lateral dimensions of the prostheses respectively increasing at a first rate, the overall anterior/posterior dimensions respectively increasing at a second rate, the first rate and the second rate defining a ratio substantially equal to or less than 0.84.

In another form thereof, the present disclosure provides a set of distal femoral prostheses particularly adapted for female anatomy, each femoral prosthesis including a distal nonarticulating surface and an anterior nonarticulating surface, including a plurality of standard aspect ratio prostheses respectively having increasingly greater overall anterior/posterior dimensions defined between points located most anteriorly and most posteriorly on each prosthesis and respectively having increasingly greater medial/lateral dimensions defined between points located most medially and most laterally at an anterior/posterior location defined by a distal most point on the anterior nonarticulating surface on each prosthesis; the medial/lateral dimensions of the prostheses respectively increasing at a first rate, the overall anterior/posterior dimensions respectively increasing at a second rate, the first rate and the second rate defining a ratio substantially equal to or less than 0.44.

In a further form thereof, the present disclosure provides a set of distal femoral prostheses particularly adapted for female anatomy, each femoral prosthesis including a distal nonarticulating surface having an anterior end and a posterior end, including a plurality of prostheses respectively having increasingly greater overall anterior/posterior dimensions defined between points located most anteriorly and most posteriorly on each prosthesis and having increasingly greater distal taper angles defined between a lateral line connecting the anterior end and the posterior end of the distal nonarticulating surface and a medial line connecting the anterior end and the posterior end of the distal nonarticulating surface on each prosthesis; the distal taper angles of the prostheses respectively increasing at a first rate, the overall anterior/posterior dimensions of the prostheses respectively increasing at a second rate, the first rate and the second rate defining a ratio substantially equal to or greater than 0.22.

In still another form thereof, the present disclosure provides a set of distal femoral prostheses particularly adapted for female anatomy, each femoral prosthesis including a distal nonarticulating surface having an anterior end and a posterior end, including a plurality of prostheses respectively having increasingly greater overall anterior/posterior dimensions defined between points located most anteriorly and most posteriorly on each prosthesis and having increasingly greater distal taper angles defined between a lateral line connecting the anterior end and the posterior end of the distal nonarticulating surface and a medial line connecting the anterior end and the posterior end of the distal nonarticulating surface on each prosthesis; at least some of the overall anterior/posterior dimensions and the distal taper angles falling within a conceptual boundary defined by an upper boundary and a lower boundary, the upper boundary defined by a line connecting a first point and a third point, the lower boundary defined by a line connecting a second point and a fourth point, the first point having an approximately 52.0 overall anterior/posterior dimension and an approximately 27.0° distal taper angle, the second point having an approximately 58.0 overall anterior/posterior dimension and an approximately 22.5° distal taper angle, the third point having an approximately 77.0 overall anterior/posterior dimension and an approximately 32.0° distal taper angle, and the fourth point having an approximately 77.0 overall anterior/posterior dimension and an approximately 26.0° distal taper angle.

In yet another form thereof, the present disclosure provides a set of distal femoral prostheses particularly adapted for female anatomy, each femoral prosthesis including a distal nonarticulating surface having an anterior end and a posterior end, including a plurality of prostheses respectively having increasingly greater overall anterior/posterior dimensions defined between points located most anteriorly and most posteriorly on each prosthesis and having increasingly greater distal taper angles defined between a lateral line connecting the anterior end and the posterior end of the distal nonarticulating surface and a medial line connecting the anterior end and the posterior end of the distal nonarticulating surface on each prosthesis; at least some of the overall anterior/posterior dimensions and the distal taper angles falling within a conceptual boundary defined by an upper boundary and a lower boundary, the upper boundary defined by a line connecting a first point and a third point, the lower boundary defined by a line connecting a second point and a fourth point, the first point having an approximately 52.0 overall anterior/posterior dimension and an approximately 34.0° distal taper angle, the second point having an approximately 58.0 overall anterior/posterior dimension and an approximately 22.5° distal taper angle, the third point having an approximately 77.0 overall anterior/posterior dimension and an approximately 32.0° distal taper angle, and the fourth point having an approximately 77.0 overall anterior/posterior dimension and an approximately 26.0° distal taper angle.

In a further form thereof, the present disclosure provides a distal femoral prosthesis, including a non-articulating surface including a distal plane and an anterior non-articular surface; lateral and medial anterior condyles; a patellar sulcus defined between the condyles, the patellar sulcus having a maximum thickness between approximately 2.5 mm and 3.2 mm between an anterior most point on the sulcus and the anterior non-articular surface.

In another form thereof, the present disclosure provides a distal femoral prosthesis, including a non-articulating surface including a distal plane and an anterior non-articular surface; lateral and medial anterior condyles each defining an anterior articular surface, at least one of the condyles having a maximum thickness between approximately 4.0 mm and 6.1 mm between an anterior most point on the anterior articular surface of the condyle and the anterior non-articular surface.

In yet another form thereof, the present disclosure provides a distal femoral prosthesis, including a patellar sulcus disposed between lateral and medial anterior condyles of the prosthesis, the sulcus having an end point; a non-articulating surface having a distal plane; and a lateralization distance defined at the end point between a first line extending from an intersection of the distal plane and the sulcus and the end point, the lateralization distance greater than 5.0 mm.

BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS

The above-mentioned and other features and advantages of this invention, and the manner of attaining them, will become more apparent and the invention itself will be better understood by reference to the following description of embodiments of the invention taken in conjunction with the accompanying drawings, wherein:

FIG. 1 is a side view of an exemplary distal femoral prosthesis in accordance with the present invention;

FIG. 2 is another side view of the prosthesis of FIG. 1, illustrating certain dimensions thereof;

FIG. 3 is a distal view of the prosthesis of FIG. 2, viewed along line 3-3 of FIG. 2 and shown superimposed on a known prosthesis;

FIG. 4 further illustrates the anatomical M/L vs. A/P dimensional relationship of the prosthesis of FIG. 3 at dimension “B-B”;

FIG. 5 is a graph illustrating a representative anatomical mid-box M/L vs. A/P dimensional relationship with respect to male and female femurs of various size;

FIG. 5A is a view of an anatomic overall A/P dimension for a representative femur;

FIG. 5B is a view of an anatomic mid-box M/L dimension for a representative femur;

FIG. 6 is a graph of mid-box M/L vs. overall A/P for prostheses designed in accordance with the present invention as compared with several known prostheses;

FIG. 7 is a graph of anterior M/L along a dimension “B-B” vs. overall A/P for prostheses designed in accordance with the present invention as compared with several known prostheses;

FIG. 8 is a graph of posterior M/L vs. overall A/P for prostheses designed in accordance with the present invention as compared with several known prostheses;

FIG. 9 is a graph of the ratio of (mid-box M/L/overall A/P) vs. overall A/P for the prostheses of FIG. 6;

FIG. 10 is a graph of the ratio of (anterior M/L along dimension “B-B”/overall A/P) vs. overall A/P for the prostheses of FIG. 7;

FIG. 11 is a graph of the ratio of (posterior M/L/overall A/P) vs. overall A/P for the prostheses of FIG. 8;

FIG. 12 is a distal view of an exemplary prosthesis designed in accordance with the present invention, shown superimposed on a known prosthesis and illustrating the profiles and the distal taper angles of same;

FIG. 13 is a graph of distal taper angle vs. overall A/P for prostheses designed in accordance with the present invention as compared with several known prostheses;

FIG. 14 is a distal view of an exemplary prosthesis;

FIG. 15 is a side view of the prosthesis of FIG. 14, illustrating the recessed patellar sulcus thereof as compared with a known prosthesis;

FIG. 16 is another side view of the prosthesis of FIG. 14, illustrating the reduced profile of the anterior condyles thereof as compared with a known prosthesis;

FIG. 17A is an A/P view of a known prosthesis having conventional sulcus tracking;

FIG. 17B is an A/P view of an exemplary prosthesis in accordance with the present invention having a more lateralized sulcus tracking;

FIG. 18 is a graph of A-A M/L vs. overall A/P for prostheses designed in accordance with the present invention as compared with several known prostheses; and

FIG. 19 is a graph of the ratio of (A-A M/L/overall A/P) vs. overall A/P for the prostheses of FIG. 18.

Corresponding reference characters indicate corresponding parts throughout the several views. The exemplifications set out herein illustrate exemplary embodiments of the invention, and such exemplifications are not to be construed as limiting the scope of the invention any manner.

DETAILED DESCRIPTION

As used herein, the following directional definitions apply. Anterior and posterior mean nearer the front or nearer the rear of the body, respectively. Thus, with respect to the prostheses described herein, anterior refers to that portion of the knee that is nearer the front of the body, when the leg is in an extended position. Proximal and distal mean nearer to or further from the root of a structure, respectively. For example, the distal femur is a part of the knee joint while the proximal femur is part of the hip joint. Finally, the adjectives medial and lateral mean nearer the sagittal plane or further from the sagittal plane, respectfully. The sagittal plane is an imaginary vertical plane through the middle of the body that divides the body into right and left halves.

Distal femoral knee prostheses made in accordance with the present invention are intended to be used to restore knee joint function in patients with severe pain and disability due, for example, to Rheumatoid arthritis, osteoarthritis, traumatic arthritis polyarthritis; collagen disorders, and/or avascular necrosis of the femoral condyle; post-traumatic loss of joint configuration, particularly when there is patellofemoral erosion, dysfunction or prior patellectomy; moderate valgus, varus, flexion deformities, or other conditions.

Referring initially to FIG. 1, a distal femoral prosthesis 50 for a TKR/TKA according to one embodiment of the present invention is shown, and generally includes an external articulating surface 52 and a bone contacting non-articulating internal surface 54. Articulating surface 52 includes an anterior articulating surface 56, a distal articulating surface 58, a lateral posterior condylar articulating surface 60, and a medial posterior condylar articulating surface 62. Prosthesis 50 may be made of any biocompatible material having the mechanical properties necessary to function as a human knee distal femoral prosthesis. Preferably, prosthesis 50 is made of titanium, titanium alloy, cobalt chrome alloy, stainless steel, or a ceramic. Referring additionally to FIG. 3, prosthesis 50 further includes patellar flange 64 including lateral and medial anterior condyles 66 and 68, respectively, as well as patellar sulcus 70 disposed between lateral and medial anterior condyles 66 and 68. Prosthesis also includes lateral and medial posterior condyles 72 and 74, respectively.

Referring to FIG. 1, the internal non-articulating portion 54 of prosthesis 50 is adapted to receive a resected distal femur. The surgical cuts made to the distal femur can be made by any means, in any sequence and in any configuration known to those of skill in the art of knee arthroplasty. Exemplary cut guides and processes for resecting the distal femur are shown and described in U.S. patent application Ser. No. 11/151,062, entitled ADJUSTABLE CUT GUIDE, filed on Jun. 13, 2005 and U.S. patent application Ser. No. 11/154,774, entitled MULTI-POSITIONABLE CUT GUIDE, filed on Jun. 16, 2005, assigned to the assignee of the present invention, the disclosures of which are expressly incorporated herein by reference.

In a preferred embodiment, prosthesis 50 comprises a plurality of chamfer surfaces corresponding to a plurality of chamfer surfaces or “box cuts” made in the distal femur. Non-articular surface 54 may comprise a porous metal surface or any surface likely to promote the growth of bone therein. Non-articular surface 54 of prosthesis 50 preferably comprises anterior non-articular surface 76, distal anterior non-articular surface 78, distal non-articular surface 80, two distal posterior non-articular surfaces 82, and two posterior non-articular surfaces 84.

Distal non-articular surface 80 is generally flat and adapted to receive the distal-most surface of the resected femur. Distal non-articular surface 80 comprises an anterior end and a posterior end. The anterior end of distal non-articular surface 80 abuts one end of distal anterior non-articular surface 78, which surface 78 also includes an anterior end and a posterior end. Surface 78 extends from surface 80 anteriorly and superiorly such that an obtuse angle is formed between surfaces 78 and 80. Anterior non-articular surface 76 extends superiorly from the anterior end of surface 78.

The posterior end of distal non-articular surface 80 abuts one end of each distal posterior non-articular surface 82, which surfaces 82 also include an anterior end and a posterior end. Surfaces 82 extend from surface 80 posteriorly and superiorly such that an obtuse angle is formed between surfaces 82 and 80. Posterior non-articular surfaces 84 extend superiorly from the posterior ends of surfaces 82, respectively.

As discussed in detail below, for many patients, particularly female patients, it is desirable to construct a set of prostheses 50 of varying size wherein the medial/lateral (“M/L”) width dimensions of the prostheses correspond more closely to the actual anatomical M/L width dimensions of the female femur and articulating surfaces. As described below, prostheses 50 addresses this concern by offering the surgeon a set of narrower prostheses in the M/L dimensions for a given set of anterior/posterior (“A/P”) prosthesis sizes which will allow the surgeon to use a prosthesis with both a correct A/P size and more accurate and optimized M/L dimensions to provide optimal prosthesis sizing and joint kinematics as compared to conventional prostheses.

In FIG. 3, the profile 86 of prosthesis 50 is superimposed upon profile 88 of a known prosthesis. As described in detail below, prosthesis 50 has a unique, substantially trapezoidal shape or profile 86 when viewed distally with a more pronounced narrowing of the M/L dimensions as compared to the shape or profile 88 of a known prosthesis starting, with reference to the resected femur, at the posterior distal facet and progressing anteriorly to the anterior distal facet. Referring to FIGS. 2 and 3, prosthesis 50 is shown and is characterized below with reference to the following directions: anterior “A”, posterior “P”, distal “D”, proximal “PR”, medial “M” and lateral “L”, as well as the following dimensions. Dimension “Posterior” is the M/L width at the widest point across the posterior condyles 72, 74 of prosthesis 50. Dimension “C-C” is the M/L width at the junction of the posterior distal facet and the distal plane, i.e., the M/L width along the intersection between distal non-articular surface 80 and distal posterior non-articular surfaces 82. Dimension “B-B” is the M/L width at the junction of the distal plane and the distal anterior facet, i.e., the M/L width along the intersection between distal non-articular surface 80 and distal anterior non-articular surface 78. Dimension “A-A” is the M/L width at the junction of the distal anterior facet and the posterior side of the anterior flange, i.e., the M/L width along the intersection of distal anterior non-articular surface 78 and anterior non-articular surface 76. Dimension “MB” is the M/L width at a “mid-box” point of prosthesis 50, i.e., along a line located on distal non-articular surface 80 substantially midway between Dimension C-C and Dimension B-B.

As described below, the profiles of a set of prostheses 50 can also be described in terms of an increasing narrowing of the M/L dimensions relative to known prostheses on a per size basis. It has been observed that, for given female femurs, for example, the M/L dimensions are sometimes smaller than those of known prostheses of the proper A/P dimension. This discrepancy is small on the smaller A/P size prostheses and increases as the A/P size increases. For example, referring to FIG. 5, a representative mid-box M/L vs. A/P dimensional relationship with respect to the actual human anatomy of distal femurs for males and females is shown. Representative female data is generally grouped together at lower values of mid-box M/L and representative male data is generally grouped together at higher values of mid-box M/L. Best fit lines for female and male data have been included on FIG. 5 to show the general trend of representative mid-box M/L dimensions. As may be seen from FIG. 5, there exists a clear distinction between the representative M/L dimension vs. the A/P dimension for a female distal femur as compared to a male distal femur. FIGS. 5A and 5B show exemplary anatomic overall A/P and mid-box M/L dimensions for a representative femur.

In FIG. 2, the overall A/P (“Overall A/P”) dimension is the distance between two lines perpendicular to distal non-articular surface 80 that pass through the most posterior point on the posterior face of exterior articulating surface 58 and through the most anterior point on the anterior face of exterior articulating surface 58, respectively. FIG. 2 also shows a dashed outline of a resected femur with prosthesis 50 positioned thereon.

As an exemplary comparison, the dimensions “Posterior”, “B-B”, “A-A”, and “Overall A/P” and the ratios of these values for conventional prostheses (“Conventional 1”, including five increasing sizes C through G) are compared with corresponding dimensions and ratios of a set of prostheses designed in accordance with the present invention (“Embodiment 1”, including five increasing sizes C through G). These values are presented in Table 1 below. Unless otherwise indicated, all numerical dimensional values presented herein are in millimeters (“mm”).

TABLE 1

Overall

Overall

SIZE
A/P
“Post.”
“B-B”
“A-A”
A/P
“Post.”
“B-B”
“A-A”

Embodiment 1
Conventional 1

C
52.2
58.0
49.6
41.1
53.5
60.0
53.6
45.1

D
56.3
61.3
51.5
42.6
57.6
64.0
55.8
46.5

E
60.2
64.5
53.5
43.7
61.5
68.0
59.3
49.1

F
64.2
67.9
55.4
45.0
65.4
72.0
63.2
52.0

G
69.2
71.0
57.3
46.3
70.4
76.5
67.3
56.2

Embodiment 1 -
Conventional 1 -

M/L/“Overall
M/L/“Overall

A/P” RATIOS
A/P” RATIOS

C
52.2
1.11
0.95
0.79
53.5
1.12
1.00
0.84

D
56.3
1.09
0.92
0.76
57.6
1.11
0.97
0.81

E
60.2
1.07
0.89
0.73
61.5
1.11
0.96
0.80

F
64.2
1.06
0.86
0.70
65.4
1.10
0.97
0.79

G
69.2
1.03
0.83
0.67
70.4
1.09
0.96
0.80

Table 2 below sets forth the results of a first order equation fit to data sets for several sets of prostheses including Conventional 1, Conventional 2 (which is similar to Conventional 1), Embodiment 1, Embodiment 2 (which is similar to Embodiment 1), as well as five other sets of known competitive prostheses, designated Competitive 1, Competitive 2, Competitive 3, Competitive 4, and Competitive 5. The data sets include Posterior M/L vs. Overall A/P and the Ratio (Posterior M/L vs. Overall A/P) vs. Overall A/P.

TABLE 2

Ratio (Posterior M/

Posterior M/L
L/Overall A/P)

vs. Overall A/P
vs. Overall A/P

Best fit regression line
Best fit regression line

Equation
Slope
Equation
Slope

Conventional 1
y = 0.9811x + 7.595
0.9811
y = −0.002x + 1.2277
−0.0020

Conventional 2
y = 0.9878x + 6.0634
0.9878
y = −0.0015x + 1.1798
−0.0015

Embodiment 1
y = 0.8036x + 16.228
0.8036
y = −0.0044x + 1.3431
−0.0044

Embodiment 2
y = 0.809x + 14.987
0.8090
y = −0.0039x + 1.2965
−0.0039

Competitive 1
y = 0.9411x + 7.1008
0.9411
y = −0.0016x + 1.1565
−0.0016

Competitive 2
y = 0.987x + 6.8225
0.9870
y = −0.0017x + 1.2015
−0.0017

Competitive 3
y = 0.976x + 5.7825
0.9760
y = −0.0013x + 1.1521
−0.0013

Competitive 4
y = 0.9757x + 6.6279
0.9757
y = −0.0016x + 1.1836
−0.0016

Competitive 5
y = 0.9336x + 11.318
0.9336
y = −0.0031x + 1.3111
−0.0031

From the data in Table 2, it may be seen that there is a difference in the slopes of the sets of prostheses of Embodiments 1 and 2 as compared to the slopes of the sets of the known prostheses. In particular, it may be seen from the data in Table 2 that the sets of prostheses of Embodiments 1 and 2 have a narrowing posterior M/L dimension with increasing A/P size, as indicated by slopes less than 0.93, for example, as opposed to a substantially parallel or one-to-one relationship between the posterior M/L dimension and the A/P dimension with increasing A/P size as in the sets of known prostheses, as indicated by slopes of 0.93 and above. Thus, in the sets of known prostheses, the posterior M/L dimension and the A/P dimension increase at substantially the same rate with increasing A/P size. Also, the slope of the ratio (posterior M/L/overall A/P) vs. overall A/P is less than −0.0032 for the sets of prostheses of Embodiments 1 and 2 while the corresponding slope for the known sets of prostheses is greater than −0.0032, indicating that the sets of prostheses of Embodiments 1 and 2 have an increasingly more pronounced narrowing of the posterior M/L dimension with increasing A/P size. In this manner, the sets of prostheses designed in accordance with the present invention offer a surgeon a unique combination of implant posterior M/L widths with varying A/P size for an overall system or set of prostheses, wherein such sets of prostheses are more anatomically optimized for the female anatomy as compared with the sets of known prostheses.

Table 3 below sets forth the results of a first order equation fit to data sets for several sets of prostheses including Conventional 1, Conventional 2 (which is similar to Conventional 1), Embodiment 1, Embodiment 2 (which is similar to Embodiment 1), as well as five other sets of known competitive prostheses, designated Competitive 1, Competitive 2, Competitive 3, Competitive 4, and Competitive 5. The data sets include B-B M/L vs. Overall A/P and the Ratio (B-B M/L vs. Overall A/P) vs. Overall A/P.

TABLE 3

Ratio (Anterior M/L

Anterior M/L “B-B”
“B-B”/Overall A/P)

vs. Overall A/P
vs. Overall A/P

Best fit regression line
Best fit regression line

Equation
Slope
Equation
Slope

Conventional 1
y = 0.834x + 8.3768
0.8340
y = −0.0023x + 1.112
−0.0023

Conventional 2
y = 0.8432x + 6.9003
0.8432
y = −0.0018x + 1.0681
−0.0018

Embodiment 1
y = 0.4626x + 25.012
0.4626
y = −0.0071x + 1.3173
−0.0071

Embodiment 2
y = 0.4626x + 25.012
0.4626
y = −0.0066x + 1.2797
−0.0066

Competitive 1
y = 0.9062x + 3.2306
0.9062
y = −0.0007x + 1.0017
−0.0007

Competitive 2
y = 0.8057x + 12.588
0.8057
y = −0.0031x + 1.2033
−0.0031

Competitive 3
y = 0.893x + 5.5381
0.8930
y = −0.0012x + 1.0578
−0.0012

Competitive 4
y = 1.0588x + 0.1731
1.0588
y = −0.0001x + 1.0697
−0.0001

Competitive 5
y = 0.7937x + 12.218
0.7937
y = −0.0036x + 1.217
−0.0036

From the data in Table 3, it may be seen that there is a significant difference in slope for the sets of prostheses of Embodiments 1 and 2 as compared with the slopes of the known sets of prostheses. The magnitudes of the anterior M/L “B-B” values for a given A/P dimension are more pronounced, i.e., the variance in width at dimension B-B, namely, an anterior width, over various A/P sizes between the sets of prostheses of Embodiments 1 and 2 and the known sets of prostheses is more dramatically pronounced. Specifically, sets of prostheses of Embodiments 1 and 2 have a narrowing anterior M/L dimension with increasing A/P size, as indicated by slopes less than 0.78, for example, as opposed to a substantially parallel or one-to-one relationship between the anterior M/L dimension and the A/P dimension with increasing A/P size as in the sets of known prostheses, as indicated by slopes of 0.78 and above. Thus, in the sets of known prostheses, the anterior M/L dimension and the A/P dimension increase at substantially the same rate with increasing A/P size. Also, the slope of the ratio (anterior M/L “B-B”/overall A/P) vs. overall A/P is greater than −0.0038 for the sets of prostheses of Embodiments 1 and 2, while the corresponding slope for the known sets of prostheses is less than −0.0038, indicating that the sets of prostheses of Embodiments 1 and 2 have increasingly more pronounced narrowing of the anterior M/L “B-B” dimension with increasing A/P size. In this manner, the prostheses designed in accordance with the present invention offer a surgeon a unique combination of implant M/L widths as an overall system of prostheses, wherein such sets of prostheses are more anatomically optimized for the female anatomy as compared with the sets of known prostheses.

As another exemplary comparison, the dimensions “Posterior”, “MB”, “B-B”, and “Overall A/P” for conventional prostheses (“Conventional 3”, “Conventional 4”, and “Conventional 5” including five increasing sizes C through G) are compared with corresponding dimensions of a set of prostheses designed in accordance with the present invention (“Embodiment 3”, “Embodiment 4”, and “Embodiment 5” including five increasing sizes C through G). In one embodiment, the values for Conventional 5 and Embodiment 5 may be average values of Conventionals 3 and 4 and Embodiments 3 and 4, respectively. These values are presented in Table 4 below.

TABLE 4

SIZE
Overall A/P
Posterior
MB
B-B
Overall A/P
Posterior
MB
B-B

Embodiment 4
Conventional 4

C
53.3
58.0
55.9
50.2
54.4
60.0
58.6
53.6

D
57.5
61.4
58.4
52.0
58.6
64.0
62.1
55.8

E
61.2
64.7
60.8
54.0
62.5
68.0
65.9
59.3

F
65.3
68.1
63.5
56.0
66.5
72.0
70.2
63.2

G
70.4
71.5
66.0
58.0
71.5
76.5
74.0
67.3

Embodiment 3
Conventional 3

C
52.3
58.0
55.9
50.2
53.5
60.0
58.6
53.6

D
56.4
61.4
58.4
52.0
57.6
64.0
62.0
55.7

E
60.2
64.7
60.8
54.0
61.5
68.0
65.9
59.3

F
64.2
68.1
63.5
56.0
65.5
72.0
70.2
63.2

G
69.4
71.5
66.0
58.0
70.5
76.5
74.0
67.2

Embodiment 5
Conventional 5

C
52.8
58.0
55.9
50.2
54.0
60.0
58.6
53.6

D
56.9
61.4
58.4
52.0
58.1
64.0
62.0
55.8

E
60.7
64.7
60.8
54.0
62.0
68.0
65.9
59.3

F
64.8
68.1
63.5
56.0
66.0
72.0
70.2
63.2

G
69.9
71.5
66.0
58.0
71.0
76.5
74.0
67.3

FIG. 6 is a graph of the dimension mid-box M/L vs. overall A/P for the following sets of prostheses, each in increasing sizes C through G: Conventional 5, Embodiment 5, as well as eight other sets of known competitive prostheses, designated Competitive 1, Competitive 2, Competitive 3, Competitive 4, Competitive 5, Competitive 6, Competitive 7, and Competitive 8.

FIG. 7 is a graph of the dimension B-B M/L vs. overall A/P for the following sets of prostheses, each in increasing sizes C through G: Conventional 5, Embodiment 5, as well as eight other sets of known competitive prostheses, designated Competitive 1, Competitive 2, Competitive 3, Competitive 4, Competitive 5, Competitive 6, Competitive 7, and Competitive 8.

FIG. 8 is a graph of the dimension Posterior M/L vs. overall A/P for the following sets of prostheses, each in increasing sizes C through G: Conventional 5, Embodiment 5, as well as eight other sets of known competitive prostheses, designated Competitive 1, Competitive 2, Competitive 3, Competitive 4, Competitive 5, Competitive 6, Competitive 7, and Competitive 8.

Table 5 below sets forth the results of a first order equation fit to each of the data sets shown in FIGS. 6, 7, and 8 as well as for the data sets of Embodiments 3 and 4 and Conventional 3 and 4 in Table 4.

TABLE 5

Posterior
Mid-box

M/L vs.
M/L vs.
B-B M/L vs.

Overall A/P
Overall A/P
Overall A/P

Best Fit
Best Fit
Best Fit

Regression
Regression
Regression

Line
Line
Line

Implant
Slope
y-Intercept
Slope
y-Intercept
Slope
y-Intercept

Conventional 3
0.98
7.53
0.93
8.63
0.83
8.35

Conventional 4
0.98
6.82
0.93
8.02
0.83
7.66

Conventional 5
0.98
7.17
0.93
8.32
0.83
8.01

Embodiment 3
0.80
16.31
0.60
24.89
0.46
26.02

Embodiment 4
0.80
15.51
0.60
24.30
0.46
25.55

Embodiment 5
0.80
15.91
0.60
24.59
0.46
25.79

Competitive 1
1.06
1.27
1.01
3.36
0.94
1.61

Competitive 2
0.99
6.82
1.09
−1.10
0.80
12.80

Competitive 3
0.98
5.78
0.91
11.72
0.83
10.13

Competitive 4
0.98
6.63
1.02
3.40
1.06
0.17

Competitive 5
0.90
13.67
0.91
11.72
0.82
10.34

Competitive 6
1.06
0.61
1.08
−0.70
1.06
−4.03

Competitive 7
0.86
19.80
0.77
19.86
0.78
9.00

Competitive 8
0.91
−0.64
0.91
−1.64
0.91
−2.64

From the data in Table 5, it may be seen that there is a difference in the slopes of the sets of prostheses of Embodiments 3, 4, and 5 as compared to the slopes of the sets of the known prostheses. In particular, it may be seen from the data in Table 5 that the sets of prostheses of Embodiments 3, 4, and 5 have a narrowing posterior M/L dimension with increasing A/P size, as indicated by slopes less than approximately 0.85, for example, as opposed to a substantially parallel or one-to-one relationship between the posterior M/L dimension and the A/P dimension with increasing A/P size as in the sets of known prostheses, as indicated by slopes of 0.86 and above. In exemplary embodiments, the slope of posterior M/L dimension with increasing A/P size for prostheses 50 may be as small as approximately 0.50, 0.55, 0.60, or 0.65 or as large as approximately 0.85, 0.84, 0.83, 0.81, 0.80, 0.75, or 0.70. In an exemplary embodiment, the slope of posterior M/L dimension with increasing A/P size for prostheses 50 is approximately 0.80. Thus, the posterior M/L dimension for prostheses 50 increases at a lesser rate than the corresponding overall A/P dimension. In contrast, in the sets of known prostheses, the posterior M/L dimension and the A/P dimension increase at substantially the same rate with increasing A/P size. In this manner, the sets of prostheses designed in accordance with the present invention offer a surgeon a unique combination of implant posterior M/L widths with varying A/P size for an overall system or set of prostheses, wherein such sets of prostheses are more anatomically optimized for the female anatomy as compared with the sets of known prostheses.

Furthermore, from the data in Table 5, it may be seen that there is a significant difference in slope for the sets of prostheses of Embodiments 3, 4, and 5 as compared with the slopes of the known sets of prostheses when looking at the B-B and MB dimensions. The magnitudes of the B-B values and MB values for a given A/P dimension are more pronounced, i.e., the variance in width at dimension B-B or MB over various A/P sizes between the sets of prostheses of Embodiments 3, 4, and 5 and the known sets of prostheses is more dramatically pronounced.

Specifically, sets of prostheses of Embodiments 3, 4, and 5 have a narrowing B-B M/L dimension with increasing A/P size, as indicated by slopes less than approximately 0.77, for example, as opposed to a substantially parallel or one-to-one relationship between the B-B M/L dimension and the A/P dimension with increasing A/P size as in the sets of known prostheses, as indicated by slopes of 0.78 and above. In exemplary embodiments, the slope of the B-B M/L dimension with increasing A/P size for prostheses 50 may be as small as approximately 0.30, 0.35, 0.40, or 0.45 or as large as 0.77, 0.76, 0.75, 0.74, 0.72, 0.70, 0.65, 0.60, or 0.50. In an exemplary embodiment, the slope is of the B-B M/L dimension with increasing A/P size for prostheses 50 is approximately 0.46. Thus, the B-B M/L dimension for prostheses 50 increases at a lesser rate than the corresponding overall A/P dimension. In contrast, in the sets of known prostheses, the B-B M/L dimension and the A/P dimension increase at substantially the same rate with increasing A/P size.

Furthermore, sets of prostheses of Embodiments 3, 4, and 5 have a narrowing MB M/L dimension with increasing A/P size, as indicated by slopes less than 0.76, for example, as opposed to a substantially parallel or one-to-one relationship between the MB M/L dimension and the A/P dimension with increasing A/P size as in the sets of known prostheses, as indicated by slopes of 0.77 and above. In exemplary embodiments, the slope of the MB M/L dimension with increasing A/P size for prostheses 50 may be as small as approximately 0.40, 0.45, 0.50, 0.55, or 0.57 or as large as approximately 0.76, 0.75, 0.74 0.73, 0.72, 0.71, 0.70, 0.65, or 0.60. In an exemplary embodiment, the slope of the MB M/L dimension with increasing A/P size for prostheses 50 is approximately 0.60. Thus, the MB M/L dimension for prostheses 50 increases at a lesser rate than the corresponding overall A/P dimension. In contrast, in the sets of known prostheses, the MB M/L dimension and the A/P dimension increase at substantially the same rate with increasing A/P size.

In this manner, the prostheses designed in accordance with the present invention offer a surgeon a unique combination of implant M/L widths as an overall system of prostheses, wherein such sets of prostheses are more anatomically optimized for the female anatomy as compared with the sets of known prostheses.

Referring again to FIG. 6, the range of values for Embodiment 5 generally falls within the lines of a conceptual boundary, such as a parallelogram, as shown in solid dashed lines. Clearly, no other known prostheses have MB M/L dimensions that fall within this range of values for the MB M/L dimensions and corresponding Overall A/P dimensions. The parallelogram is essentially defined by four points defined by coordinates given by (Overall A/P dimension, MB Dimension): A first point or upper left corner (“First Point”)—(52.0, 55.0); A second point or lower left corner (“Second Point”)—(52.0, 47.0); A third point or upper right corner (“Third Point”)—(77.0, 78.5); and a fourth point or lower right corner (“Fourth Point”)—(77.0, 70.0). Thus, the upper boundary of the parallelogram defined by First Point and Third Point may be given by the equation MB M/L=0.94*Overall A/P+6.12 and the lower boundary defined by Second Point and Fourth Point may be given by the equation MB M/L=0.92*Overall A/P−0.84.

As set forth in Table 6 below, the Overall A/P dimensions and the ratios of the dimensions “Posterior”, “MB”, and “B-B” vs. “Overall A/P” are given for Embodiments 3, 4, and 5 as well as for conventional prostheses Conventional 3, 4, and 5.

TABLE 6

Ratio
Ratio
Ratio

Ratio
Ratio
Ratio

(Posterior
(MB
(B-B

(Posterior
(MB
(B-B

M/L/
M/L/
M/L/

M/L/
M/L/
M/L/

Overall
Overall
Overall
Overall

Overall
Overall
Overall

SIZE
A/P
A/P)
A/P)
A/P)
Overall A/P
A/P)
A/P)
A/P)

Embodiment 4
Conventional 4

C
53.3
1.09
1.05
0.94
54.4
1.10
1.08
0.98

D
57.5
1.07
1.02
0.91
58.6
1.09
1.06
0.95

E
61.2
1.06
0.99
0.88
62.5
1.09
1.05
0.95

F
65.3
1.04
0.97
0.86
66.5
1.08
1.06
0.95

G
70.4
1.02
0.94
0.82
71.5
1.07
1.04
0.94

Embodiment 3
Conventional 3

C
52.3
1.11
1.07
0.96
53.5
1.12
1.09
1.00

D
56.4
1.09
1.04
0.92
57.6
1.11
1.08
0.97

E
60.2
1.08
1.01
0.90
61.5
1.11
1.07
0.96

F
64.2
1.06
0.99
0.87
65.5
1.10
1.07
0.97

G
69.4
1.03
0.95
0.84
70.5
1.09
1.05
0.95

Embodiment 5
Conventional 5

C
52.8
1.10
1.06
0.95
54.0
1.11
1.09
0.99

D
56.9
1.08
1.03
0.91
58.1
1.10
1.07
0.96

E
60.7
1.07
1.00
0.89
62.0
1.10
1.06
0.96

F
64.8
1.05
0.98
0.86
66.0
1.09
1.06
0.96

G
69.9
1.02
0.94
0.83
71.0
1.08
1.04
0.95

FIG. 9 is a graph of the ratio of (MB M/L/Overall A/P) vs. Overall A/P for the prostheses described above with respect to FIG. 6. FIG. 10 is a graph of the ratio of (B-B M/L/Overall A/P) vs. Overall A/P for the prostheses described above with respect to FIG. 7. FIG. 11 is a graph of the ratio of (Posterior M/L/Overall A/P) vs. Overall A/P for the prostheses described above with respect to FIG. 8.

Table 7 below sets forth the results of a first order equation fit to each of the data sets shown in FIGS. 9, 10, and 11 as well as for the data sets of Embodiments 3 and 4 and Conventional 3 and 4 in Table 6.

TABLE 7

Ratio
Ratio
Ratio

(Posterior M/L
(Mid-box M/L
(B-B M/L

vs. Overall
vs. Overall
vs. Overall

A/p) vs.
A/P) vs.
A/P) vs.

Overall A/P
Overall A/P
Overall A/P

Best Fit
Best Fit
Best Fit

Regression
Regression
Regression

Line
Line
Line

Implant
Slope
y-Intercept
Slope
y-Intercept
Slope
y-Intercept

Conventional 3
−0.0020
1.23
−0.0023
1.21
−0.0023
1.11

Conventional 4
−0.0017
1.20
−0.0020
1.18
−0.0020
1.08

Conventional 5
−0.0018
1.21
−0.0021
1.20
−0.0022
1.10

Embodiment 3
−0.0044
1.34
−0.0068
1.42
−0.0071
1.33

Embodiment 4
−0.0041
1.31
−0.0064
1.39
−0.0068
1.30

Embodiment 5
−0.0042
1.32
−0.0066
1.41
−0.0069
1.31

Competitive 1
−0.0003
1.10
−0.0008
1.11
−0.0004
0.99

Competitive 2
−0.0017
1.20
0.0003
1.06
−0.0032
1.21

Competitive 3
−0.0013
1.15
−0.0003
1.09
−0.0024
1.14

Competitive 4
−0.0016
1.18
−0.0009
1.13
−0.0001
1.07

Competitive 5
−0.0032
1.32
−0.0032
1.31
−0.0025
1.15

Competitive 6
−0.0001
1.08
0.0001
1.06
0.0010
0.94

Competitive 7
−0.0053
1.51
−0.0054
1.43
−0.0024
1.08

Competitive 8
0.0001
0.89
0.0004
0.86
0.0006
0.83

From the data in Table 7 it may be seen that there is a difference in the slopes of the sets of prostheses of Embodiments 3, 4, and 5 as compared to the slopes of the sets of the known prostheses. In particular, it may be seen from the data in Table 7 that the sets of prostheses of Embodiments 3, 4, and 5 have a narrowing posterior M/L dimension with increasing A/P size, as indicated by the slope of the ratio (posterior M/L/overall A/P) vs. overall A/P being less than −0.0032 for the sets of prostheses of Embodiments 3, 4, and 5 while the corresponding slope for the known sets of prostheses is greater than or equal to −0.0032, except for the Competitive 7 prosthesis, indicating that the sets of prostheses of Embodiments 3, 4, and 5 have an increasingly more pronounced narrowing of the posterior M/L dimension with increasing A/P size. In this manner, the sets of prostheses designed in accordance with the present invention offer a surgeon a unique combination of implant posterior M/L widths with varying A/P size for an overall system or set of prostheses, wherein such sets of prostheses are more anatomically optimized for the female anatomy as compared with the sets of known prostheses.

Furthermore, it may be seen that there is a significant difference in slope for the sets of prostheses of Embodiments 3, 4, and 5 as compared with the slopes of the known sets of prostheses when looking at the MB and B-B M/L dimensions. The magnitudes of the anterior M/L “B-B” values for a given A/P dimension are more pronounced, i.e., the variance in width at dimension B-B, namely, an anterior width, over various A/P sizes between the sets of prostheses of Embodiments 3, 4, and 5 and the known sets of prostheses is more dramatically pronounced. Specifically, the slope of the ratio (B-B M/L/overall A/P) vs. overall A/P is less than −0.0032 for the sets of prostheses of Embodiments 3, 4, and 5, while the corresponding slope for the known sets of prostheses is greater than or equal to −0.0032, indicating that the sets of prostheses of Embodiments 3, 4, and 5 have increasingly more pronounced narrowing of the B-B M/L dimension with increasing A/P size.

Furthermore, the slope of the ratio (MB M/L/Overall A/P) vs. Overall A/P is less than −0.0054 for the sets of prostheses of Embodiments 3, 4, and 5, while the corresponding slope for the known sets of prostheses is greater than or equal to −0.0054, indicating that the sets of prostheses of Embodiments 3, 4, and 5 have increasingly more pronounced narrowing of the B-B M/L dimension with increasing A/P size. Prostheses 50 may have slope values for the ratios of MB M/L/Overall A/P vs. Overall A/P with increasing A/P size which may be as small as −0.0075, −0.0072, −0.0069, −0.0066, or −0.0063 or as large as −0.0055, −0.0057, −0.0059, or −0.0061. In this manner, the prostheses designed in accordance with the present invention offer a surgeon a unique combination of implant M/L widths as an overall system of prostheses, wherein such sets of prostheses are more anatomically optimized for the female anatomy as compared with the sets of known prostheses.

Referring again to FIG. 9, the range of values for Embodiment 5 generally falls within the lines of a conceptual boundary, such as a four-sided polygon, as shown in solid dashed lines. Clearly, no other known prostheses have MB M/L/Overall A/P ratios that fall within this range of values for the MB M/L/Overall A/P ratios and corresponding Overall A/P dimensions. The polygon is essentially defined by four points defined by coordinates given by (Overall A/P dimension, MB M/L/Overall A/P ratio): A first point or upper left corner (“First Point”)—(52.0, 1.06); A second point or lower left corner (“Second Point”)—(52.0, 0.90); A third point or upper right corner (“Third Point”)—(77.0, 1.02); and a fourth point or lower right corner (“Fourth Point”)—(77.0, 0.91). Thus, the upper boundary of the parallelogram defined by First Point and Third Point may be given by the equation MB M/L/Overall A/P Ratio=−0.0015*Overall A/P+1.14 and the lower boundary defined by Second Point and Fourth Point may be given by the equation MB M/L/Overall A/P Ratio=0.0002*Overall A/P+0.89.

As another exemplary comparison, the dimensions “A-A” and “Overall A/P” for conventional prostheses (“Conventional 3”, “Conventional 4”, and “Conventional 5” including five increasing sizes C through G) are compared with corresponding dimensions of a set of prostheses designed in accordance with the present invention (“Embodiment 3”, “Embodiment 4”, and “Embodiment 5” including five increasing sizes C through G). In one embodiment, the values for Conventional 5 and Embodiment 5 may be average values of Conventionals 3 and 4 and Embodiments 3 and 4, respectively. These values are presented in Table 8 below.

TABLE 8

SIZE
Overall A/P
A-A
Overall A/P
A-A

Embodiment 4

Conventional 4

C
53.3
41.0
54.4
45.0

D
57.5
42.6
58.6
46.3

E
61.2
43.6
62.5
48.9

F
65.3
44.9
66.5
51.7

G
70.4
46.1
71.5
56.0

Embodiment 3

Conventional 3

C
52.3
41.0
53.5
45.0

D
56.4
42.6
57.6
46.4

E
60.2
43.6
61.5
48.5

F
64.2
44.9
65.5
51.6

G
69.4
46.1
70.5
55.7

Embodiment 5

Conventional 5

C
52.8
41.0
54.0
45.0

D
56.9
42.6
58.1
46.3

E
60.7
43.6
62.0
48.7

F
64.8
44.9
66.0
51.7

G
69.9
46.1
71.0
55.8

FIG. 18 is a graph of the dimension A-A M/L vs. overall A/P for the following sets of prostheses, each in increasing sizes C through G: Conventional 5, Embodiment 5, as well as eight other sets of known competitive prostheses, designated Competitive 1, Competitive 2, Competitive 3, Competitive 4, Competitive 5, Competitive 6, Competitive 7, and Competitive 8.

Table 9 below sets forth the results of a first order equation fit to the data sets shown in FIG. 18 as well as for the data sets of Embodiments 3 and 4 and Conventional 3 and 4 in Table 8.

TABLE 9

A-A M/L

vs. Overall

A/P Best Fit

Regression Line

Implant
Slope
y-Intercept

Conventional 3
0.64
9.66

Conventional 4
0.65
8.59

Conventional 5
0.65
9.13

Embodiment 3
0.30
25.78

Embodiment 4
0.30
25.47

Embodiment 5
0.30
25.63

Competitive 1
0.54
13.20

Competitive 2
0.46
19.33

Competitive 3
0.68
9.93

Competitive 4
0.76
6.05

Competitive 5
0.28
30.74

Competitive 6
0.86
2.98

Competitive 7
0.68
6.54

Competitive 8
0.57
13.19

From the data in Table 9, it may be seen that there is a difference in the slopes of the sets of prostheses of Embodiments 3, 4, and 5 as compared to the slopes of the sets of the known prostheses. In particular, it may be seen from the data in Table 9 that the sets of prostheses of Embodiments 3, 4, and 5 have a narrowing A-A M/L dimension with increasing A/P size, as indicated by slopes less than approximately 0.46, except for Competitive 5, for example, as opposed to a substantially parallel or one-to-one relationship between the posterior M/L dimension and the A/P dimension with increasing A/P size as in the sets of known prostheses, as indicated by slopes greater than or equal 0.46. In an exemplary embodiment, the slope of A-A M/L dimension with increasing A/P size for prostheses 50 is approximately 0.30.

As set forth in Table 10 below, the Overall A/P dimensions and the ratios of the dimension “A-A” vs. “Overall A/P” are given for Embodiments 3, 4, and 5 as well as for conventional prostheses Conventional 3, 4, and 5.

TABLE 10

Ratio (A-A M/L/

Ratio (A-A M/L/

SIZE
Overall A/P
Overall A/P)
Overall A/P
Overall A/P)

Embodiment 4
Conventional 4

C
53.3
0.77
54.4
0.83

D
57.5
0.74
58.6
0.79

E
61.2
0.71
62.5
0.78

F
65.3
0.69
66.5
0.78

G
70.4
0.66
71.5
0.78

Embodiment 3
Conventional 3

C
52.3
0.78
53.5
0.84

D
56.4
0.76
57.6
0.81

E
60.2
0.72
61.5
0.79

F
64.2
0.70
65.5
0.79

G
69.4
0.66
70.5
0.79

Embodiment 5
Conventional 5

C
52.8
0.78
54.0
0.83

D
56.9
0.75
58.1
0.80

E
60.7
0.72
62.0
0.78

F
64.8
0.69
66.0
0.78

G
69.9
0.66
71.0
0.79

FIG. 19 is a graph of the ratio of (A-A M/L/Overall A/P) vs. Overall A/P for the prostheses described above with respect to FIG. 18.

Table 11 below sets forth the results of a first order equation fit to the data sets shown in FIG. 19 as well as for the data sets of Embodiments 3 and 4 and Conventional 3 and 4 in Table 10.

TABLE 11

Ratio (A-A M/L vs. Overall A/P)

vs. Overall A/P Best Fit

Regression Line

Implant
Slope
y-Intercept

Conventional 3
−0.0027
0.97

Conventional 4
−0.0023
0.94

Conventional 5
−0.0025
0.95

Embodiment 3
−0.0071
1.15

Embodiment 4
−0.0067
1.13

Embodiment 5
−0.0069
1.14

Competitive 1
−0.0031
0.94

Competitive 2
−0.0049
1.08

Competitive 3
−0.0024
0.99

Competitive 4
−0.0016
0.96

Competitive 5
−0.0073
1.24

Competitive 6
0.0007
0.77

Competitive 7
−0.0019
0.90

Competitive 8
−0.0033
0.99

From the data in Table 11 it may be seen that there is a difference in the slopes of the sets of prostheses of Embodiments 3, 4, and 5 as compared to the slopes of the sets of the known prostheses. In particular, it may be seen from the data in Table 7 that the sets of prostheses of Embodiments 3, 4, and 5 have a narrowing A-A M/L dimension with increasing A/P size, as indicated by the slope of the ratio (A-A M/L/overall A/P) vs. overall A/P being less than −0.0049, for the sets of prostheses of Embodiments 3, 4, and 5 while the corresponding slope for the known sets of prostheses is greater than or equal to −0.0049, except for the Competitive 5 prosthesis, indicating that the sets of prostheses of Embodiments 3, 4, and 5 have an increasingly more pronounced narrowing of the A-A M/L dimension with increasing A/P size. In this manner, the sets of prostheses designed in accordance with the present invention offer a surgeon a unique combination of implant A-A M/L widths with varying A/P size for an overall system or set of prostheses, wherein such sets of prostheses are more anatomically optimized for the female anatomy as compared with the sets of known prostheses.

Referring again to FIG. 18, the range of values for Embodiment 5 generally falls below the line of a conceptual boundary. The boundary may be defined by two points defined by coordinates given by (Overall A/P dimension, A-A M/L dimension): a First Point (52.0, 40.3) and a Second Point (77.0, 51.8). Thus, the boundary defines a line given by the following equation: A-A M/L=0.46*Overall A/P+16.38.

Referring again to FIG. 19, the range of values for Embodiment 5 generally falls below the line of a conceptual boundary. The boundary may be defined by two points defined by coordinates given by (Overall A/P dimension, A-A M/L/Overall A/P ratio): a First Point (52.0, 0.78) and a Second Point (77.0, 0.67). Thus, the boundary defines a line given by the following equation: A-A M/L/Overall A/P=−0.0041*Overall A/P+0.99.

Another way of characterizing the design of the present prostheses is by distal taper angle, “DT”. As used herein and referring to FIG. 12, in which the profile 86 of prosthesis 50 is superimposed upon profile 88 of a known prosthesis, the distal taper angle “DT” is the angle between two lines on opposite sides of the prosthesis each connecting a point 90 on the edge of the anterior distal chamfer, i.e., along dimension “B-B” and a point 92 on the edge of the posterior distal chamfer, i.e., along dimension “C-C”. In FIG. 12, distal taper angles DT₁and DT₂for prosthesis 50 and for a known prosthesis are illustrated, respectively. It may be seen from FIG. 12 that the distal taper angle DT₁for prosthesis 50 is greater than the distal taper angle DT₂for the known prosthesis.

FIG. 13 is a chart of distal taper angle vs. overall A/P for several of the prostheses described above. As before, a first order curve fit was applied to the data in FIG. 13 and the results are set forth below in Table 12.

TABLE 12

Distal Taper Angle

vs. Overall A/P

Best fit regression line

Equation
Slope

Conventional 3
y = 0.01x + 18.72
0.01

Conventional 4
y = 0.01x + 18.79
0.01

Conventional 5
y = 0.01x + 17.75
0.01

Embodiment 3
y = 0.28x + 7.10
0.28

Embodiment 4
y = 0.28x + 6.80
0.28

Embodiment 5
y = 0.28x + 6.95
0.28

Competitive 1
y = −0.15x + 24.81
−0.15

Competitive 2
y = 0.20x + 3.04
0.20

Competitive 3
y = −0.08x + 19.43
−0.08

Competitive 4
y = −0.24x + 18.77
−0.24

Competitive 5
y = −0.18x + 33.07
−0.18

Competitive 6
y = −0.19x + 21.99
−0.19

Competitive 7
y = −0.48x + 67.89
−0.48

Competitive 8
y = −0.06x + 9.37
−0.06

As may be seen from the data in Table 12, the ratio between distal taper angle and overall A/P of the prostheses of Embodiments 3-5 differs from the known prostheses. In particular, the foregoing data indicates that prostheses of Embodiments 3-5 have a more pronounced and consistent increase in distal taper angle with increasing A/P size, as evidenced by a slope of greater than 0.20. Additionally, as may be seen from FIG. 13, the set of prostheses of Embodiment 5 has greater distal taper angles throughout the range of sizes of the prostheses than the known sets of prostheses with positive slopes as set forth in Table 12. Further, the distal taper angle curve for the set of prostheses of Embodiment 5 has a consistent upward slope as opposed to the randomized “see-saw” curves or flattened curves of the known sets of prostheses, indicating a more precise, parallel or substantial one-to-one relationship between distal taper angle and overall A/P with increasing A/P size for the set of prostheses of Embodiment 5. In exemplary embodiments, the slope of the distal taper angle with increasing A/P size for prostheses 50 may be as small as approximately 0.21, 0.22, 0.23, 0.24, 0.25, 0.26, 0.27, or 0.30 or as large as approximately 0.42, 0.39, 0.36, or 0.33. In an exemplary embodiment, the slope of the distal taper angle with increasing A/P size for prostheses 50 is approximately 0.28.

As shown in FIG. 13, the range of values for Embodiment 5 generally fall within the lines of a conceptual boundary, such as a four-sided polygon, as shown in solid dashed lines. Clearly, no other known prostheses have distal taper angle values that fall within this range of values for the distal taper angle and corresponding Overall A/P dimensions. The four-sided polygon is essentially defined by four points defined by coordinates given by (Overall A/P dimension, Distal Taper Angle): An upper left corner (“1B”)—(52.0, 27.0°); A lower left corner (“4”)—(58.0, 22.5°); An upper right corner (“2”)—(77.0, 32.0°); and a lower right corner (“3”)—(77.0, 26.0°). Alternatively, the upper left corner may be at coordinates (52.0, 34.0°) (“1A”). Alternatively, points 1A, 1B, 2, 3, and 4 define a five-sided polygon which defines the conceptual boundary. The distal taper angles for Embodiment 5 may be approximately equal to or greater than 21°. The values of distal taper angles for prostheses 50 may be as small as approximately 21°, 22°, 23°, 25°, or 27, as large as approximately 35°, 33°, 31°, or 29°.

Referring again to FIG. 8, the sets of prostheses may be grouped into a standard aspect ratio category and a non-standard aspect ratio category. As used herein, the term “standard aspect ratio” describes a set of prostheses which, for overall A/P values ranging from approximately 52.0 mm to 77.0 mm, have corresponding posterior M/L dimensions which generally fall between an Upper Boundary and a Lower Boundary. The Upper Boundary and Lower Boundary may be defined by lines having points defined by coordinates given by (Overall A/P dimension, Posterior M/L dimension). The Upper Boundary may be defined by a line connecting a first or lower left point (“First Upper Point”)—(52.0, 59.0) and a second or upper right point (“Second Upper Point”)—(77.0, 83.5). The Lower Boundary may be defined by three exemplary boundaries. In one exemplary embodiment, Lower Boundary 1 may be defined by a line connecting a first or lower left point (“First Lower Point 1”)—(52.0, 51.0) and a second or upper right point (“Second Lower Point 1”)—(77.0, 73.0). In another exemplary embodiment, Lower Boundary 2 may be defined by a line connecting a first or lower left point (“First Lower Point 2”)—(52.0, 53.0) and a second or upper right point (“Second Lower Point 2”)—(77.0, 75.0). In yet another exemplary embodiment, Lower Boundary 3 may be defined by a line connecting a first or lower left point (“First Lower Point 3”)—(52.0, 55.0) and a second or upper right point (“Second Lower Point 3”)—(77.0, 77.0). For prostheses having overall A/P values ranging from approximately 52.0 mm to 77.0 mm, the following equations may define the Upper and Lower Boundaries: the Upper Boundary line may be defined by the following equation: Posterior M/L=0.98*Overall A/P+8.04; the Lower Boundary 1 line may be defined by the following equation: Posterior M/L=0.88*Overall A/P+5.24; the Lower Boundary 2 line may be defined by the following equation: Posterior M/L=0.88*Overall A/P+7.24; and the Lower Boundary 3 line may be defined by the following equation: Posterior M/L=0.88*Overall A/P+9.24.

Referring again to FIG. 11, the Upper Boundary and Lower Boundary described above which are used to define the standard aspect ratio category for sets of prostheses may also be used with the posterior M/L/Overall A/P ratio for overall A/P values ranging from approximately 52.0 mm to 77.0 mm. The Upper Boundary and Lower Boundary may be defined by lines having points defined by coordinates given by (Overall A/P dimension, Posterior M/L/Overall A/P Ratio). The Upper Boundary may be defined by a line connecting a first or lower left point (“First Upper Point”)—(52.0, 1.13) and a second or upper right point (“Second Upper Point”)—(77.0, 1.08). The Lower Boundary may be defined by three exemplary boundaries. Lower Boundary 1 may be defined by a line connecting a first or lower left point (“First Lower Point 1”)—(52.0, 0.98) and a second or upper right point (“Second Lower Point 1”)—(77.0, 0.95). Lower Boundary 2 may be defined by a line connecting a first or lower left point (“First Lower Point 2”)—(52.0, 1.02) and a second or upper right point (“Second Lower Point 2”)—(77.0, 0.97). Lower Boundary 3 may be defined by a line connecting a first or lower left point (“First Lower Point 3”)—(52.0, 1.06) and a second or upper right point (“Second Lower Point 3”)—(77.0, 1.00). For prostheses having overall A/P values ranging from approximately 52.0 mm to 77.0 mm, the following equations may define the Upper and Lower Boundaries: the Upper Boundary line may be defined by the following equation: Posterior M/L/Overall A/P=−0.0020*Overall A/P+1.24; the Lower Boundary 1 line may be defined by the following equation: Posterior M/L/Overall A/P=−0.0013*Overall A/P+1.05; the Lower Boundary 2 line may be defined by the following equation: Posterior M/L/Overall A/P=−0.0018*Overall A/P+1.11; and the Lower Boundary 3 line may be defined by the following equation: Posterior M/L/Overall A/P=−0.0023*Overall A/P+1.18.

Referring to FIGS. 8 and 11 and applying the foregoing definition of standard aspect ratio, it may be seen that the prostheses described by Competitive 5, Competitive 7, and Competitive 8 fall within the non-standard aspect ratio category.

Referring again to FIG. 13, Embodiment 5 has a distal taper angle greater than or equal to 21°. In contrast, all other standard aspect ratio prostheses have a distal taper angle less than 21°.

Referring again to FIG. 6, Embodiment 5 has MB M/L dimensions below the boundary defined by a line connecting the First Point (52.0, 55.0) and the Third Point (77.0, 78.5). Thus, for the range of Overall A/P values between 52.0 and 77.0, Embodiment 5 has MB M/L dimensions which fall below the line given by the following equation: MB M/L=0.94*Overall A/P+6.12. In contrast, all other standard aspect ratio prostheses have MB M/L dimensions which fall above the line given by the foregoing equation.

Referring again to FIG. 9, Embodiment 5 has MB M/L/Overall A/P ratios below the boundary defined by a line connecting the First Point (52.0, 1.06) and the Third Point (77.0, 1.02). Thus, for the range of Overall A/P values between 52.0 and 77.0, Embodiment 5 has MB M/L/Overall A/P ratios which fall below the line given by the following equation: MB M/L/Overall A/P=−0.0015*Overall A/P+1.14. In contrast, all other standard aspect ratio prostheses have MB M/L/Overall A/P ratios which fall above the line given by the foregoing equation.

Referring again to FIG. 7, Embodiment 5 has B-B M/L dimensions below the boundary defined by a line connecting the First Point (52.0, 50.0) and the Second Point (77.0, 70.5). Thus, for the range of Overall A/P values between 52.0 and 77.0, Embodiment 5 has B-B M/L dimensions which fall below the line given by the following equation: B-B M/L=0.82*Overall A/P+7.36. In contrast, all other standard aspect ratio prostheses have B-B M/L dimensions which fall above the line given by the foregoing equation.

Referring again to FIG. 10, Embodiment 5 has B-B M/L/Overall A/P ratios below the boundary defined by a line connecting the First Point (52.0, 0.96) and the Second Point (77.0, 0.92). Thus, for the range of Overall A/P values between 52.0 and 77.0, Embodiment 5 has B-B M/L/Overall A/P ratios which fall below the line given by the following equation: B-B M/L/Overall A/P=−0.0018*Overall A/P+1.06. In contrast, all other standard aspect ratio prostheses have B-B M/L/Overall A/P ratios which fall above the line given by the foregoing equation.

Referring again to FIG. 18, Embodiment 5 has A-A M/L dimensions below the boundary defined by a line connecting the Third Point (52.0, 40.1) and the Fourth Point (77.0, 53.5). Thus, for the range of Overall A/P values between 52.0 and 77.0, Embodiment 5 has A-A M/L dimensions which fall below the line given by the following equation: A-A M/L=0.54*Overall A/P+12.23. In contrast, all other standard aspect ratio prostheses have A-A M/L dimensions which fall above the line given by the foregoing equation.

Referring again to FIG. 19, Embodiment 5 has A-A M/L/Overall A/P ratios below the boundary defined by a line connecting the Third Point (52.0, 0.77) and the Fourth Point (77.0, 0.69). Thus, for the range of Overall A/P values between 52.0 and 77.0, Embodiment 5 has A-A M/L/Overall A/P ratios which fall below the line given by the following equation: A-A M/L/Overall A/P=−0.0031*Overall A/P+0.93. In contrast, all other standard aspect ratio prostheses have A-A M/L/Overall A/P ratios which fall above the line given by the foregoing equation.

Referring again to Table 5, Embodiments 3-5 have slopes of Posterior M/L dimension with increasing A/P size which are less than 0.98. Prostheses 50 may have slope values for the Posterior M/L dimension with increasing A/P size which may be as small as approximately 0.50, 0.55, 0.60, or 0.65 or as large as approximately 0.96, 0.95, 0.94, 0.91, 0.88, 0.85, 0.84, 0.83, 0.81, 0.80, 0.75, or 0.70. In contrast, all other standard aspect ratio prostheses have slopes of Posterior M/L dimension with increasing A/P size which are greater than or equal to 0.98.

Referring still to Table 5, Embodiments 3-5 have slopes of MB M/L dimension with increasing A/P size which are less than 0.91. Prostheses 50 may have slope values for the MB M/L dimension with increasing A/P size which may be as small as approximately 0.40, 0.45, 0.50, 0.55, or 0.57 or as large as approximately 0.90, 0.89, 0.87, 0.84, 0.81, 0.79, 0.76, 0.75, 0.74, 0.73, 0.72, 0.71, 0.70, 0.65, or 0.60. In contrast, all other standard aspect ratio prostheses have slopes of MB M/L dimension with increasing A/P size which are greater than or equal to 0.91.

Referring again to Table 5, Embodiments 3-5 have slopes of B-B M/L dimension with increasing A/P size which are less than 0.80. Prostheses 50 may have slope values for the B-B M/L dimension with increasing A/P size which may be as small as approximately 0.30, 0.35, 0.40, or 0.45 or as large as 0.79, 0.78, 0.77, 0.76, 0.75, 0.74, 0.72, 0.70, 0.65, 0.60, or 0.50. In contrast, all other standard aspect ratio prostheses have slopes of B-B M/L dimension with increasing A/P size which are greater than or equal to 0.80.

Referring to Table 9, Embodiments 3-5 have slopes of A-A M/L dimension with increasing A/P size which are less than 0.46. Prostheses 50 may have slope values for the A-A M/L dimension with increasing A/P size which may be as small as 0.15, 0.20, 0.25, or 0.30 or as large as 0.45, 0.44, 0.42, 0.40, 0.37, 0.34, or 0.31. In contrast, all other standard aspect ratio prostheses have slopes of A-A M/L dimension with increasing A/P size which are greater than or equal to 0.46.

Referring to Table 7, Embodiments 3-5 have slopes for the ratios of Posterior M/L/Overall A/P vs. Overall A/P with increasing A/P size which are less than −0.0020. Prostheses 50 may have slope values for the ratios of Posterior M/L/Overall A/P vs. Overall A/P with increasing A/P size which may be as small as −0.0060, −0.0055, −0.0050, −0.0045, −0.0040 or as large as −0.0021, −0.0022, −0.0025, −0.0030, or −0.0035. In contrast, all other standard aspect ratio prostheses have slopes for the ratios of Posterior M/L/Overall A/P vs. Overall A/P with increasing A/P size which are greater than or equal to −0.0020.

Referring again to Table 7, Embodiments 3-5 have slopes for the ratios of MB M/L/Overall A/P vs. Overall A/P with increasing A/P size which are less than −0.0023. Prostheses 50 may have slope values for the ratios of MB M/L/Overall A/P vs. Overall A/P with increasing A/P size which may be as small as −0.0075, −0.0072, −0.0069, −0.0066, or −0.0063 or as large as −0.0022, −0.0025, −0.0030, −0.0035, −0.0040, −0.0045, −0.0050, −0.0055, or −0.0060. In contrast, all other standard aspect ratio prostheses have slopes for the ratios of MB M/L/Overall A/P vs. Overall A/P with increasing A/P size which are greater than or equal to −0.0023.

Referring again to Table 7, Embodiments 3-5 have slopes for the ratios of B-B M/L/Overall A/P vs. Overall A/P with increasing A/P size which are less than −0.0032. Prostheses 50 may have slope values for the ratios of B-B M/L/Overall A/P vs. Overall A/P with increasing A/P size which may be as small as −0.0085, −0.0080, −0.0075, or −0.0070 or as large as −0.0031, −0.0032, −0.0034, −0.0037, −0.0040, −0.0045, −0.0050, −0.0055, −0.0060, or −0.0065. In an exemplary embodiment, the slope value for the ratio of B-B M/L/Overall A/P vs. Overall A/P with increasing A/P size is approximately −0.0069. In another exemplary embodiment, the slope value for the ratio of B-B M/L/Overall A/P vs. Overall A/P with increasing A/P size is approximately −0.0068. In yet another exemplary embodiment, the slope value for the ratio of B-B M/L/Overall A/P vs. Overall A/P with increasing A/P size is approximately −0.0071. In contrast, all other prostheses have slopes for the ratios of B-B M/L/Overall A/P vs. Overall A/P with increasing A/P size which are greater than or equal to −0.0032.

Referring again to Table 11, Embodiments 3-5 have slopes for the ratios of A-A M/L/Overall A/P vs. Overall A/P with increasing A/P size which are less than −0.0049. Prostheses 50 may have slope values for the ratios of A-A M/L/Overall A/P vs. Overall A/P with increasing A/P size which may be as small as −0.0080, −0.0075, −0.0070, or −0.0065 or as large as −0.0050, −0.0051, −0.0053, −0.0055, or −0.0060. In contrast, all other standard aspect ratio prostheses have slopes for the ratios of A-A M/L/Overall A/P vs. Overall A/P with increasing A/P size which are greater than or equal to −0.0049.

In accordance with another aspect of the present invention, the prosthesis 50 includes a recessed or reduced profile patellar sulcus as well as a thinned or reduced profile anterior flange condyles in comparison with known prostheses to alleviate the potential for the thicknesses of the patellar sulcus and the anterior flange condyles to be greater than the thickness of the femoral bone which is resected during the TKR/TKA procedure.

Referring to FIG. 14, a distal view of prosthesis 50 is shown, including sulcus 70 disposed between lateral and medial anterior condyles 66 and 68, respectively. FIG. 15 is a side view of prosthesis 50, in which the anterior profile of sulcus 70 of prosthesis 50 in accordance with the present invention is shown as curve 94, and the anterior profile of the sulcus of a known prosthesis is represented by curve 96. A line parallel to non-articular anterior surface 76 and tangent to curve 94 or 96 at an anterior most point thereof may be used to define dimension D1. Dimension D1 represents the maximum thickness of sulcus 70, i.e., the width of sulcus 70 between non-articular anterior surface 76 and an anterior most point along curve 94 or curve 96. As may be seen from FIG. 15, curve 94 of sulcus 70 of prosthesis 50 is recessed, or shifted posteriorly, as compared to curve 96 of the sulcus of a known prosthesis, wherein dimension D1 of prosthesis 50 is less than dimension D1 of the known prosthesis. Advantageously, recessing the patellar sulcus 70 of prostheses 50 will allow the patella to articulate slightly more posterior than in known prostheses which will reduce the likelihood of the thickness of the patellar sulcus to be greater than the thickness of the femoral bone which is resected when the joint is in extension and early flexion.

Referring to FIG. 16, the anterior profile of lateral or medial anterior condyle 66 or 68 of prosthesis 50 in accordance with the present invention is shown as curve 102, and the anterior profile of an anterior condyle of a known prosthesis is shown as curve 104. Dimension D2 represents the maximum thickness, or depth, of one or both of the lateral and medial anterior condyles between non-articular anterior surface 76 and a line drawn parallel to surface 76 and tangent to curve 102 or curve 104 at an anterior most point thereof. As may be seen from FIG. 16, curve 102 of at least one of the lateral and medial anterior condyles 66 and 68 of prosthesis 50 is recessed, or shifted posteriorly, as compared to curve 104 of the anterior condyles of a known prosthesis, wherein dimension D2 of prosthesis 50 is less than dimension D2 of the known prosthesis. Advantageously, the reduction of the anterior flange condyle thickness reduces the anterior flange profile and creates smoother, less abrupt changes in geometry as the condyles blend to the edges of the components while maintaining adequate height to prevent subluxation of the patella.

In Table 13 below, dimensions D1 and D2 described above are shown in accordance with a set of prostheses 50 (Embodiment 5) compared to a known set of prostheses (Conventional 5), as well as the differences between dimensions D1 and D2 of the present prosthesis and known prosthesis. Unless otherwise indicated, all numerical dimensional values presented herein are in millimeters (“mm”).

TABLE 13

Differences

(Conventional 5 −

Embodiment 5
Conventional 5
Embodiment 5)

SIZE
“D1”
“D2”
“D1”
“D2”
“D1”
“D2”

C
2.5
5.1
3.5
6.3
1.0
1.1

D
2.5
5.3
3.6
6.4
1.0
1.1

E
2.6
5.0
3.6
6.2
1.1
1.2

F
2.5
5.3
3.6
6.4
1.1
1.1

G
3.2
6.4
4.2
7.3
1.1
0.9

As may be seen from Table 13, the sulcus and condyle thicknesses D1 and D2 respectively, of prostheses of Embodiment 5 are considerably reduced as compared to the known prostheses (Conventional 5). In particular, the sulcus thickness D1 of an exemplary embodiment may range from about 2.5 mm to 3.2 mm and the condyle thickness D2 may range from about 5.0 mm to 6.4 mm. In exemplary embodiments, the sulcus thickness D1 of prostheses 50 may be as small as approximately 2.5, 2.6, 2.7, or 2.8 mm or as large as approximately 3.2, 3.1, 3.0, or 2.9 mm. In exemplary embodiments, the condyle thickness D2 of prostheses 50 may be as small as approximately 4.0, 4.3, 4.7, 5.0, 5.2, 5.4, or 5.6 mm or as large as approximately 6.4, 6.2, 6.1, 6.0, or 5.8 mm. As such, in an example, a ratio of the maximum condylar thickness D2 to the maximum sulcus thickness D1 can be in the range of 1.92:1 to 2.12:1, as is evident from Table 13. In another example, the maximum thickness D2 of the condyle is 1.92 to 2.12 times greater than the maximum thickness D1 of the sulcus, as is evident from Table 13. In yet another example, the maximum patellar sulcus thickness D1 of Embodiment 5 is less than the maximum patellar sulcus thickness D1 of Conventional 5 by 23.8 percent to 30.6 percent and the maximum condylar thickness D2 of Embodiment 5 is less than the maximum condylar thickness D2 of Conventional 5 by 12.3 percent to 19.4 percent, as is evident from Table 13.

The present prostheses further include a modified patellar sulcus tracking to further optimize conformance of the prostheses with female anatomy. The Q-angle (“quadriceps angle”) is formed in the frontal plane by a pair of line segments, one extending from the tibial tubercle to the middle of the patella and the other extending from the middle of the patella to the anterior superior iliac spine (ASIS). In adults, the Q-angle is typically 14° for males and 17° for females, wherein the Q-angle for females is approximately 3° more lateral than that of males. Responsive to this observation, and as described in detail below, the end point of the patellar sulcus 70 of prostheses 50 is shifted 3° laterally with respect to known prostheses, i.e., in an exemplary embodiment, lateralization angle 108 is approximately 7° in FIG. 17A and approximately 10° in FIG. 17B.

FIGS. 17A and 17B show A/P views of a known prosthesis and prosthesis 50, respectively, with simulated patellas shown in FIGS. 17A and 17B as circular structures “PA” superimposed upon the anterior flanges of the prostheses. During articulation of the prosthesis, the patella will track within the patellar sulcus of the prosthesis. Referring to FIGS. 15, 17A, and 17B, the vertex 106 of lateralization angle 108 (FIGS. 17A and 17B) is located at the intersection of a plane coincident with the flat, distal non articular surface 80 (FIG. 15) of prosthesis 50 with curve 94 (FIG. 15) of the patellar sulcus 70. From vertex 106, line 110 is drawn orthogonal to distal non articular surface 80, and the end point 112 of the patellar sulcus 70 is defined as the center of the patellar sulcus 70 at a line 114 parallel to distal non articular surface 80 and disposed at varying heights “H” in accordance with varying prosthesis size. Line 118 connects vertex 106 with end point 112 of the patellar sulcus and the angle originating at vertex 106 between lines 110 and 118 is lateralization angle 108. For a range of sizes C through G of prostheses represented in FIGS. 17A and 17B having varying height dimensions “H” indicated in Table 14 below between distal non articular surface 80 and line 114, the distance between line 110 and point 112, i.e., the lateralization distance, also varies as indicated in FIGS. 17A and 17B, wherein the foregoing data is summarized below in Table 14 for a known prosthesis (Conventional 1, FIG. 17A) and prosthesis 50 (Embodiment 1, FIG. 17B). Unless otherwise indicated, all numerical dimensional values presented herein are in millimeters (“mm”).

TABLE 14

Vertical

Position

Height
Lateralization Distance
Change

From Distal
Conventional 1
Embodiment 1
Conventional 1 −

Size
Face (H)
(FIG. 17A)
(FIG. 17B)
Embodiment 1

C
28.6
3.8
5.3
1.5

D
31.3
4.1
5.8
1.7

E
31.3
4.2
5.8
1.6

F
34.8
4.5
6.5
2.0

G
38.8
5.0
7.0
2.0

As may be seen from Table 14, the lateralization distance of prostheses 50 is increased with respect to known prostheses to optimize patella tracking with the prostheses to more closely conform to female anatomy. In an exemplary embodiment, the lateralization distance is greater than 5.0 mm. In an exemplary embodiment, the lateralization distance for prostheses 50 may be as small as approximately 5.0, 5.3, 5.6, or 5.9 mm or as large as approximately 7.0, 6.7, 6.4, or 6.1 mm.

While this invention has been described as having exemplary designs, the present invention can be further modified within the spirit and scope of this disclosure. This application is therefore intended to cover any variations, uses, or adaptations of the invention using its general principles. Further, this application is intended to cover such departures from the present disclosure as come within known or customary practice in the art to which this invention pertains and which fall within the limits of the appended claims.

Claims

1. A distal femoral prosthesis, comprising: a distal portion including a planar distal non-articular surface and an opposing distal articular surface; andan anterior portion including lateral and medial anterior condyles each defining an anterior articular surface, a patellar sulcus defined between said condyles, and an anterior non-articular surface, said patellar sulcus having a maximum thickness between 2.5 mm and 3.2 mm between an anterior most point on said sulcus and said anterior non-articular surface, and at least one of said condyles having a maximum thickness between 5.0 mm and 6.4 mm between an anterior most point on said anterior articular surface of said condyle and said anterior non-articular surface;wherein a ratio of the maximum condylar thickness to the maximum patellar sulcus thickness is in the range of 1.92:1 to 2.12:1.
2. The distal femoral prosthesis of claim 1, wherein said maximum thickness of said patellar sulcus is in the range of 2.6 mm to 3.1 mm.
3. The distal femoral prosthesis of claim 1, wherein said maximum thickness of said patellar sulcus is 3.2 mm.
4. The distal femoral prosthesis of claim 1, further comprising medial and lateral posterior condyles each having a posterior non-articular surface.
5. The distal femoral prosthesis of claim 4, further comprising: a distal anterior non-articular surface connecting said planar distal non-articular surface and said anterior non-articular surfaces; anddistal posterior non-articular surfaces connecting said planar distal non-articular surface and said posterior non-articular surfaces.
6. A distal femoral prosthesis, comprising: a distal portion including a planar distal non-articular surface and an opposing distal articular surface;an anterior portion including lateral and medial anterior condyles each defining an anterior articular surface, and an anterior non-articular surface, at least one of said condyles having a maximum thickness between 5.0 mm and 6.4 mm between an anterior most point on said anterior articular surface of said condyle and said anterior non-articular surface; anda patellar sulcus defined between said condyles, said patellar sulcus having a maximum thickness between an anterior most point on said sulcus and said anterior non-articular surface, wherein said maximum thickness of said condyles is 1.92 to 2.12 times greater than said maximum thickness of said sulcus.
7. The distal femoral prosthesis of claim 6, wherein said maximum thickness of the at least one of said condyles is in the range of 5.0 mm to 6.1 mm.
8. The distal femoral prosthesis of claim 6, wherein said maximum thickness of the at least one of said condyles is 5.0 mm.
9. The distal femoral prosthesis of claim 6, wherein said maximum thickness of the at least one of said condyles is 6.4 mm.
10. The distal femoral prosthesis of claim 6, wherein said maximum thickness of the at least one of said condyles is in the range of 5.2 mm to 6.0 mm.
11. The distal femoral prosthesis of claim 6, wherein said maximum thickness of the at least one of said condyles is 5.3 mm.
12. The distal femoral prosthesis of claim 6, further comprising medial and lateral posterior condyles each having a posterior non-articular surface.
13. The distal femoral prosthesis of claim 12, further comprising: a distal anterior non-articular surface connecting said planar distal non-articular surface and said anterior non-articular surfaces; anddistal posterior non-articular surfaces connecting said planar distal non-articular surface and said posterior non-articular surfaces.
14. A set of distal femoral prostheses comprising: a first distal femoral prosthesis comprising: a first distal portion including a first distal articular surface and a first planar distal non-articular surface; anda first anterior portion including first lateral and medial anterior condyles each defining a first anterior articular surface, a first patellar sulcus defined between said condyles, and a first anterior non-articular surface, said first patellar sulcus having a first thickness defined between an anterior most point on said first patellar sulcus and said first anterior non-articular surface; anda second distal femoral prosthesis comparable in overall size to said first distal femoral prosthesis, said second distal femoral prosthesis comprising: a second distal portion including a second distal articular surface and a second planar distal non-articular surface; anda second anterior portion including second lateral and medial anterior condyles each defining a second anterior articular surface, a second patellar sulcus defined between said condyles, and a second anterior non-articular surface, said second patellar sulcus having a second thickness defined between an anterior most point on said second patellar sulcus and said second anterior non-articular surface, wherein said second thickness is less than said first thickness by 23.8 percent to 30.6 percent, andwherein at least one of said first lateral and medial anterior condyles of said first distal femoral prosthesis has a third thickness defined between an anterior most point on said first anterior articular surface of said first lateral or medial condyle and said first anterior non-articular surface, at least one of said second lateral and medial anterior condyles of said second distal femoral prosthesis has a fourth thickness defined between an anterior most point on said second anterior articular surface of said second lateral or medial condyle and said second anterior non-articular surface, and said fourth thickness is less than said third thickness by 12.3 percent to 19.4 percent.
15. The set of distal femoral prostheses of claim 14, wherein said second thickness is in the range of 2.5 mm to 3.2 mm.
16. The set of distal femoral prostheses of claim 14, wherein said fourth thickness is in the range of 5.0 mm to 6.4 mm.
17. The set of distal femoral prostheses of claim 14, wherein said second thickness is less than said first thickness by at least 24 percent.
18. The set of distal femoral prosthesis of claim 14, wherein said second thickness is less than said first thickness by no more than 30 percent.

CROSS REFERENCE TO RELATED APPLICATIONS

This application claims the benefit under Title 35, U.S.C. §119(e) of U.S. Provisional Patent Application Ser. No. 60/750,613, entitled Distal Femoral Knee Prostheses, filed Dec. 15, 2005, and U.S. Provisional Patent Application Ser. No. 60/805,933, entitled Distal Femoral Knee Prostheses, filed Jun. 27, 2006, the disclosures of which are each hereby expressly incorporated herein by reference.

US Referenced Citations (143)

Number	Name	Date	Kind
4081866	Upshaw et al.	Apr 1978	A
4340978	Buechel et al.	Jul 1982	A
4662889	Zichner et al.	May 1987	A
4888020	Horber	Dec 1989	A
4944756	Kenna	Jul 1990	A
5061271	Van Zile	Oct 1991	A
5133758	Hollister	Jul 1992	A
5137536	Koshino	Aug 1992	A
5226915	Bertin	Jul 1993	A
5282861	Kaplan	Feb 1994	A
5326361	Hollister	Jul 1994	A
5330532	Ranawat	Jul 1994	A
5445642	McNulty et al.	Aug 1995	A
5549686	Johnson et al.	Aug 1996	A
5549688	Ries et al.	Aug 1996	A
5609643	Colleran et al.	Mar 1997	A
5681354	Eckhoff	Oct 1997	A
5688279	McNulty et al.	Nov 1997	A
5728162	Eckhoff	Mar 1998	A
5776201	Colleran et al.	Jul 1998	A
5824105	Ries et al.	Oct 1998	A
5871546	Colleran et al.	Feb 1999	A
5935173	Roger et al.	Aug 1999	A
6013103	Kaufman et al.	Jan 2000	A
6039764	Pottenger et al.	Mar 2000	A
6152960	Pappas	Nov 2000	A
6197064	Haines et al.	Mar 2001	B1
6217619	Keller	Apr 2001	B1
6235060	Kubein-Meesenburg et al.	May 2001	B1
6264697	Walker	Jul 2001	B1
6325828	Dennis et al.	Dec 2001	B1
6364911	Schmotzer et al.	Apr 2002	B1
6540786	Chibrac et al.	Apr 2003	B2
6540787	Biegun et al.	Apr 2003	B2
6589283	Metzger et al.	Jul 2003	B1
6616696	Merchant	Sep 2003	B1
6699291	Augoyard et al.	Mar 2004	B1
6712856	Carignan et al.	Mar 2004	B1
6770099	Andriacchi et al.	Aug 2004	B2
6802865	Biegun et al.	Oct 2004	B2
6846329	Mcminn	Jan 2005	B2
6893467	Bercovy	May 2005	B1
7081137	Servidio	Jul 2006	B1
7306609	Schmotzer et al.	Dec 2007	B2
7364590	Siebel	Apr 2008	B2
7413577	Servidio	Aug 2008	B1
7678152	Suguro et al.	Mar 2010	B2
7695520	Metzger et al.	Apr 2010	B2
7806897	Bonutti	Oct 2010	B1
8062377	Haines	Nov 2011	B2
8075626	Dun	Dec 2011	B2
8088167	Haines	Jan 2012	B2
8298288	Walker	Oct 2012	B2
8357202	Heggendorn et al.	Jan 2013	B2
8377141	Mcminn	Feb 2013	B2
8394147	Otto et al.	Mar 2013	B2
8409293	Howard et al.	Apr 2013	B1
8480753	Collazo et al.	Jul 2013	B2
8480754	Bojarski et al.	Jul 2013	B2
8500816	Dees, Jr. et al.	Aug 2013	B2
8551179	Jones et al.	Oct 2013	B2
8721732	Samuelson et al.	May 2014	B2
9173744	Donno et al.	Nov 2015	B2
9308095	Parisi et al.	Apr 2016	B2
20030158606	Coon et al.	Aug 2003	A1
20030225458	Donkers et al.	Dec 2003	A1
20040039450	Griner et al.	Feb 2004	A1
20040172137	Blaylock et al.	Sep 2004	A1
20040249467	Meyers et al.	Dec 2004	A1
20050102032	Beynnon et al.	May 2005	A1
20050107884	Johnson et al.	May 2005	A1
20050177169	Fisher et al.	Aug 2005	A1
20050283249	Carson	Dec 2005	A1
20050283250	Coon et al.	Dec 2005	A1
20050283251	Coon et al.	Dec 2005	A1
20050283252	Coon et al.	Dec 2005	A1
20050283253	Coon et al.	Dec 2005	A1
20060129246	Steffensmeier	Jun 2006	A1
20060224244	Thomas et al.	Oct 2006	A1
20060235541	Hodorek	Oct 2006	A1
20060235542	Hodorek	Oct 2006	A1
20060287733	Bonutti	Dec 2006	A1
20070088444	Hodorek et al.	Apr 2007	A1
20070123984	Hodorek	May 2007	A1
20070135926	Walker	Jun 2007	A1
20070179607	Hodorek et al.	Aug 2007	A1
20070233269	Steines et al.	Oct 2007	A1
20080058947	Earl et al.	Mar 2008	A1
20080058948	Biegun et al.	Mar 2008	A1
20080097616	Meyers et al.	Apr 2008	A1
20080119940	Otto et al.	May 2008	A1
20080140212	Metzger et al.	Jun 2008	A1
20080188855	Brown et al.	Aug 2008	A1
20080188937	Ribic	Aug 2008	A1
20080188942	Brown et al.	Aug 2008	A1
20080243258	Sancheti	Oct 2008	A1
20080281428	Meyers et al.	Nov 2008	A1
20080288080	Sancheti	Nov 2008	A1
20090036992	Tsakonas	Feb 2009	A1
20090043395	Hotokebuchi et al.	Feb 2009	A1
20090062924	Kito et al.	Mar 2009	A1
20090105772	Seebeck et al.	Apr 2009	A1
20090132055	Ferro	May 2009	A1
20090222103	Fitz et al.	Sep 2009	A1
20090265011	Mandell	Oct 2009	A1
20090265013	Mandell	Oct 2009	A1
20090306786	Samuelson	Dec 2009	A1
20090306787	Crabtree et al.	Dec 2009	A1
20090319047	Walker	Dec 2009	A1
20090319048	Shah et al.	Dec 2009	A1
20090319049	Shah et al.	Dec 2009	A1
20090326663	Dun	Dec 2009	A1
20090326665	Wyss et al.	Dec 2009	A1
20090326666	Wyss et al.	Dec 2009	A1
20090326667	Williams et al.	Dec 2009	A1
20100036499	Pinskerova	Feb 2010	A1
20100036500	Heldreth et al.	Feb 2010	A1
20100042224	Otto et al.	Feb 2010	A1
20100161067	Saleh et al.	Jun 2010	A1
20100191298	Earl et al.	Jul 2010	A1
20100305708	Lang et al.	Dec 2010	A1
20100329530	Lang et al.	Dec 2010	A1
20110022179	Andriacchi et al.	Jan 2011	A1
20110093083	Earl et al.	Apr 2011	A1
20110144760	Wong et al.	Jun 2011	A1
20110218541	Bailey et al.	Sep 2011	A1
20110307067	Dees	Dec 2011	A1
20120203350	Hagen et al.	Aug 2012	A1
20120310362	Li et al.	Dec 2012	A1
20120323334	Jones et al.	Dec 2012	A1
20120323335	Parisi et al.	Dec 2012	A1
20120323336	Parisi et al.	Dec 2012	A1
20120323337	Parisi et al.	Dec 2012	A1
20130006370	Wogoman et al.	Jan 2013	A1
20130006371	Wogoman et al.	Jan 2013	A1
20130006376	Wogoman et al.	Jan 2013	A1
20130006378	Wogoman	Jan 2013	A1
20130035765	Dacus	Feb 2013	A1
20130197653	Hawkins et al.	Aug 2013	A1
20130226305	Donno et al.	Aug 2013	A1
20140128973	Howard et al.	May 2014	A1
20140142713	Wright et al.	May 2014	A1
20150374500	Donno et al.	Dec 2015	A1

Foreign Referenced Citations (69)

Number	Date	Country
2006325787	Oct 2013	AU
101642394	Feb 2010	CN
102076283	May 2011	CN
101330883	Mar 2013	CN
103732186	Apr 2014	CN
202007014128	Jan 2008	DE
0303467	Feb 1989	EP
0376658	Jun 1994	EP
0381352	Jun 1994	EP
0567705	Jul 1997	EP
0993812	Apr 2000	EP
1013232	Jun 2000	EP
1285638	Feb 2003	EP
1033117	Jun 2004	EP
0975286	Aug 2004	EP
1477142	Nov 2004	EP
1477143	Nov 2004	EP
1285638	Nov 2005	EP
1719478	Nov 2006	EP
1722721	Nov 2006	EP
1354571	Jun 2007	EP
1862150	Dec 2007	EP
2004099	Dec 2008	EP
1867302	Sep 2009	EP
2147660	Jan 2010	EP
2158878	Mar 2010	EP
1555962	Feb 2011	EP
2324799	May 2011	EP
2335654	Jun 2011	EP
2720646	Apr 2014	EP
2901996	Dec 2007	FR
3267055	Nov 1991	JP
0553501	Mar 1993	JP
0568987	Mar 1993	JP
9-149908	Jun 1997	JP
11504226	Apr 1999	JP
11511347	Oct 1999	JP
3469972	Nov 2003	JP
3495161	Feb 2004	JP
2004166802	Jun 2004	JP
2005532089	Oct 2005	JP
2009519781	May 2009	JP
4820547	Nov 2011	JP
5571863	Jul 2014	JP
2014522292	Sep 2014	JP
WO-9535074	Dec 1995	WO
WO-9603939	Feb 1996	WO
WO-0023010	Apr 2000	WO
WO03094782	Nov 2003	WO
WO-2004016204	Feb 2004	WO
WO-2005037147	Apr 2005	WO
WO-2005051240	Jun 2005	WO
WO-2005122967	Dec 2005	WO
WO-2006058057	Jun 2006	WO
WO2007054553	May 2007	WO
WO-2007070859	Jun 2007	WO
WO-2007109641	Sep 2007	WO
WO-2008054389	May 2008	WO
WO-2009088234	Jul 2009	WO
WO-2009088236	Jul 2009	WO
WO-2009088238	Jul 2009	WO
WO-2009105495	Aug 2009	WO
WO-2010108550	Sep 2010	WO
WO-2011072235	Jun 2011	WO
WO-2012031774	Mar 2012	WO
WO-2012112698	Aug 2012	WO
WO-2012173704	Dec 2012	WO
WO-2012173706	Dec 2012	WO
WO-2012173740	Dec 2012	WO

Non-Patent Literature Citations (121)

Entry
Article: Anthropometric Measurements of the Human Knee: Correlation to the Sizing of Current Knee Arthroplasty Systems, Kirby Hitt et al., The Journal of Bone & Joint Surgery (2003), pp. 114-122 (Hitt).
Article: Dimensions of the Knee—Radiographic and autopsy study of sizes required for a knee prosthesis, B.B. Seedhom et al., Annals of the Rheumatic Diseases (1972), pp. 54-58 (Seedhom).
Article: Knee Morphology as a Guide to Knee Replacement, Joseph S. Mensch et al., Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research No. 112, Oct. 1975, pp. 231-241 (Mensch).
Article: Rotational Landmarks and Sizing of the Distal Femur in Total Knee Arthroplasty, Pascal L. Poilvache, MD. et al., Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research, No. 331 (1996), pp. 35-46 (Poilvache).
Article: The Anatomy and Funcational Axes of the Femur, Yuki Yoshioka, MD. et al., The Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery, vol. 69A, No. 6, Jul. 1987, pp. 873-880 (Yoshioka).
Complaint of W. Norman Scott and Giles R. Scuderi filed, Sep. 9, 2010 in the US District Court of Delaware in Case No. 10-772-GMS.
Answer filed Dec. 1, 2010 of Zimmer, Inc. and Zimmer Technology, Inc. in the US District Court of Delaware in Case No. 10-772-GMS.
Office Action mailed Feb. 4, 2010 in related U.S. Appl. No. 11/780,248.
Response filed May 3, 2010 in related U.S. Appl. No. 11/611,021.
Office Action mailed Jul. 21, 2010 in related U.S. Appl. No. 11/780,248.
“U.S. Appl. No. 12/974,018, Final Office Action mailed Apr. 13, 2012”, 11 pgs.
“U.S. Appl. No. 12/974,018, Non Final Office Action mailed Nov. 10, 2011”, 5 pgs.
“U.S. Appl. No. 12/974,018, Preliminary Amendment filed Dec. 21, 2010”, 4 pgs.
“U.S. Appl. No. 12/974,018, Response filed Mar. 8, 2012 to Non Final Office Action mailed Nov. 10, 2011”, 12 pgs.
“U.S. Appl. No. 12/974,018, Response filed Oct. 12, 2012 to Final Office Action mailed Apr. 13, 2012”, 16 pgs.
“U.S. Appl. No. 13/161,624, Notice of Allowance mailed Mar. 12, 2013”, 11 pgs.
“U.S. Appl. No. 13/161,624, Response filed Feb. 26, 2013 to Restriction Requirement mailed Sep. 26, 2012”, 9 pgs.
“U.S. Appl. No. 13/161,624, Restriction Requirement mailed Sep. 26, 2012”, 8 pgs.
“U.S. Appl. No. 13/459,060, Preliminary Amendment filed Apr. 27, 2012”, 6 pgs.
“U.S. Appl. No. 13/459,061, Preliminary Amendment filed Apr. 27, 2012”, 6 pgs.
“U.S. Appl. No. 13/459,064, Preliminary Amendment filed Apr. 27, 2012”, 6 pgs.
“Australian Application Serial No. 2006325787, Office Action mailed Mar. 14, 2012”, 2 pgs.
“Australian Application Serial No. 2006325787, Office Action mailed Nov. 14, 2011”, 2 pgs.
“Australian Application Serial No. 2006325787, Response filed Feb. 21, 2012 to Office Action mailed Nov. 14, 2011”, 34 pgs.
“Chinese Application Serial No. 200680046893, Office Action mailed Aug. 3, 2012”, (W/ English Translation), 8 pgs.
“Chinese Application Serial No. 200680046893, Office Action mailed Aug. 10, 2010”, (W/ English Translation), 22 pgs.
“Chinese Application Serial No. 200680046893, Office Action mailed Dec. 6, 2011”, (W/ English Translation), 5 pgs.
“Chinese Application Serial No. 200680046893, Response filed Jan. 23, 2012 to Office Action mailed Dec. 6, 2011”, (W/ English Translation), 11 pgs.
“Chinese Application Serial No. 200680046893.7, Response filed Oct. 17, 2012 to Office Action mailed Aug. 3, 2012”, (W/ English Translation), 8 pgs.
“Extramedullary/Intramedullary Tibial Resector: Surgical Technique”, Nexgen Complete Knee Solution, Zimmer, Inc. 97-5997-02 Rev 1, (2000, 2002), 25 pgs.
“Gender Solutions Natural-Knee Flex System”, Zimmer, Inc., (2007, 2009), 6 pgs.
“Gender Solutions Natural-Knee Flex System: Surgical Technique”, Zimmer, Inc., (2007, 2008, 2009), 36 pgs.
“Gender Solutions Patello-Femoral Joint (PFJ) System: Surgical Technique”, Zimmer Inc., (2008, 2009), 38 pgs.
“International Application Serial No. PCT/EP2011/004556, International Preliminary Report on Patentability mailed Mar. 12, 2013”, 9 pgs.
“International Application Serial No. PCT/EP2011/004556, International Search Report mailed Feb. 9, 2012”, 6 pgs.
“International Application Serial No. PCT/EP2011/004556, Written Opinion mailed Mar. 12, 2013”, 9 pgs.
“International Application Serial No. PCT/US2012/035688, Partial Search Report mailed Jul. 3, 2012”, 8 pgs.
“International Application Serial No. PCT/US2012/035688, Search Report mailed Sep. 17, 2012”, 7 pgs.
“International Application Serial No. PCT/US2012/035688, Written Opinion mailed Sep. 17, 2012”, 11 pgs.
“International Application Serial No. PCT/US2012/035691, Partial Search Report mailed Jul. 10, 2012”, 8 pgs.
“International Application Serial No. PCT/US2012/035691, Written Opinion mailed Sep. 17, 2012”, 11 pgs.
“International Application Serial No. PCT/US2012/035693, Partial Search Report mailed Jun. 27, 2012”, 8 pgs.
“International Application Serial No. PCT/US2012/035693, Search Report mailed Oct. 9, 2012”, 7 pgs.
“International Application Serial No. PCT/US2012/035693, Written Opinion mailed Oct. 9, 2012”, 11 pgs.
“International Application Serial No. PCT/US2012/038531, Search Report mailed Oct. 8, 2012”, 14 pgs.
“International Application Serial No. PCT/US2012/038531, Written Opinion mailed Oct. 8, 2012”, 10 pgs.
“Japanese Application Serial No. 2008-545981, Examiners Decision of Final Refusal mailed Oct. 16, 2012”, (W/ English Translation), 3 pgs.
“Japanese Application Serial No. 2008-545981, Office Action mailed Apr. 17, 2012 ”, (W/ English Translation), 5 pgs.
“Japanese Application Serial No. 2008-545981, Office Action mailed Jul. 5, 2011”, (W/ English Translation), 13 pgs.
“Japanese Application Serial No. 2008-545981, Response filed Oct. 5, 2011 to Office Action mailed Jul. 5, 2011”, (W/ English Translation), 6 pgs.
“Japanese Application Serial No. 2008-545981, Response filed Aug. 30, 2012 to Office Action mailed Apr. 17, 2012”, (W/ English Translation), 5 pgs.
“Japanese Application Serial No. 2011-221305, Office Action mailed Feb. 26, 2013”, (W/ English Translation), 13 pgs.
“Japanese Application Serial No. 2011-221305, Office Action mailed Sep. 17, 2013”, (W/ English Translation), 5 pgs.
“Japanese Application Serial No. 2011-221305, Response filed Aug. 26, 2013 to Office Action mailed Feb. 26, 2013”, (W/ English Translation), 9 pgs.
“LPS-Flex Fixed Bearing Knee: Surgical Technique”, Zimmer, Inc., (2004, 2007, 2008), 16 pgs.
“NexGen Implant Options Surgeon-Specific”, Zimmer Inc., (2000), 16 pgs.
“NexGen LPS Fixed Knee: Surgical Technique”, Zimmer Inc., (2002, 2008), 44 pgs.
“NexGen LPS-Flex Mobile and LPS-Mobile Bearing Knees”, Zimmer, Inc., (2007, 2008), 4 pgs.
“Surgical Technique for the CR-Flex Fixed Bearing Knee”, NexGen Complete Knee Solution, Zimmer, Inc., (2003), 22 pgs.
“Unicompartmental High Flex Knee: Intramedullary, Spacer Block Option and Extramedullary Minimally Invasive Surgical Techniques”, Zimmer, Inc., (2004, 2009, 2010), 62 pgs.
U.S. Appl. No. 11/780,248, filed Jul. 19, 2007, Distal Femoral Knee Prostheses.
U.S. Appl. No. 12/974,018, filed Dec. 21, 2010, Distal Femoral Knee Prostheses.
U.S. Appl. No. 13/819,528, filed May 13, 2013, Femoral Prosthesis With Medicalized Patellar Groove.
U.S. Appl. No. 13/459,060, filed Apr. 27, 2012, Femoral Component for a Knee Prosthesis With Improved Articular Characteristics.
“U.S. Appl. No. 12/974,018, Non Final Office Action mailed Apr. 4, 2014”, 11 pgs.
“U.S. Appl. No. 13/459,060, Non Final Office Action mailed Mar. 14, 2014”, 8 pgs.
“U.S. Appl. No. 13/459,060, Response filed Jan. 3, 2014 to Restriction Requirement mailed Nov. 4, 2013”, 25 pgs.
“U.S. Appl. No. 13/459,060, Response filed Jul. 14, 2014 to Non-Final Office Action dated Mar. 14, 2014”, 30 pgs.
“U.S. Appl. No. 13/459,060, Restriction Requirement mailed Nov. 4, 2013”, 6 pgs.
“U.S. Appl. No. 13/819,528, Non Final Office Action mailed Dec. 6, 2013”, 15 pgs.
“U.S. Appl. No. 13/819,528, Response filed May 22, 2014 to Non Final Office Action mailed Dec. 6, 2013”, 15 pgs.
“U.S. Appl. No. 61/381,803, filed Sep. 10, 2010”, 23 pgs.
“Australian Application Serial No. 2006325787, Response filed May 3, 2013 to Office Action mailed Mar. 14, 2012”, 10 pgs.
“Australian Application Serial No. 2012271153, Amendment filed Jan. 16, 2014”, 13 pgs.
“Canadian Application Serial No. 2,641,966, Office Action mailed Feb. 6, 2014”, 2 pgs.
“Canadian Application Serial No. 2,641,966, Office Action mailed Jul. 16, 2013”, 2 pgs.
“Canadian Application Serial No. 2,641,966, Response filed Jan. 15, 2014 to Office Action mailed Jul. 16, 2013”, 6 pgs.
“European Application Serial No. 06840269.2, Examination Notification Art. 94(3) mailed Jan. 24, 2014”, 6 pgs.
“International Application Serial No. PCT/US2012/035691, Search Report mailed Sep. 17, 2012”, 7 pgs.
“International Application Serial No. PCT/US2012/035693, International Preliminary Report on Patentability mailed Jan. 3, 2014”, 13 pgs.
“Japanese Application Serial No. 2011-221305, Response filed Dec. 17, 2013 to Office Action mailed Sep. 17, 2013”, (W/ English Translation of Claims), 8 pgs.
“Japanese Application Serial No. 2014-515821, Request for Examination Amendment filed Apr. 8, 2014”, (W/ English Translation), 18 pgs.
“U.S. Appl. No. 12/974,018, Response filed Jul. 30, 2014 to Non-Final Office Action mailed Apr. 4, 2014”, 15 pgs.
“U.S. Appl. No. 12/974,018, Appeal Brief filed Feb. 20, 2015”, 24 pgs.
“U.S. Appl. No. 12/974,018, Final Office Action mailed Oct. 10, 2014”, 12 pgs.
“U.S. Appl. No. 13/459,060, Non Final Office Action mailed Oct. 9, 2014”, 11 pgs.
“U.S. Appl. No. 13/459,060, Response filed Feb. 18, 2015 to Non-Final Office Action mailed Oct. 9, 2014”, 23 pgs.
“U.S. Appl. No. 13/819,528, Final Office Action mailed Feb. 5, 2015”, 15 pgs.
“U.S. Appl. No. 13/819,528, Non Final Office Action mailed Aug. 12, 2014”, 10 pgs.
“U.S. Appl. No. 13/819,528, Response filed Jan. 12, 2015 to Non Final Office Action mailed Aug. 12, 2014”, 13 pgs.
“Canadian Application Serial No. 2,641,966, Office Action mailed Aug. 25, 2014”, 2 pgs.
“European Application Serial No. 06840269.2, Examination Notification Art. 94(3) mailed Nov. 12, 2014”, 4 pgs.
“U.S. Appl. No. 13/459,060, Advisory Action mailed Jun. 8, 2015”, 3 pgs.
“U.S. Appl. No. 13/459,060, Final Office Action mailed Apr. 1, 2015”, 11 pgs.
“U.S. Appl. No. 13/459,060, Response filed May 28, 2015 to Final Office Action mailed Apr. 1, 2015”, 21 pgs.
“U.S. Appl. No. 13/819,528, Advisory Action mailed Apr. 14, 2015”, 3 pgs.
“U.S. Appl. No. 13/819,528, Notice of Allowance mailed Jun. 22, 2015”, 7 pgs.
“U.S. Appl. No. 13/819,528, Preliminary Amendment filed Feb. 27, 2013”, 9 pgs.
“U.S. Appl. No. 13/819,528, Response filed Apr. 2, 2015 to Final Office Action mailed Feb. 5, 2015”, 12 pgs.
“U.S. Appl. No. 13/819,528, Response filed Apr. 29, 2015 to Advisory Action mailed Apr. 14, 2015”, 13 pgs.
“U.S. Appl. No. 13/819,528, Supplemental Preliminary Amendment filed Jul. 11, 2013 ”, 6 pgs.
“Canadian Application Serial No. 2,641,966, Response filed Feb. 25, 2015 to Office Action mailed Aug. 25, 2014”, 4 pgs.
“Canadian Application Serial No. 2,641,966, Response filed Aug. 6, 2014 to Office Action mailed Feb. 6, 2014”, 3 pgs.
“Chinese Application Serial No. 201280039703.4, Office Action mailed Mar. 30, 2015”, (W/ English Translation), 2 pgs.
“Chinese Application Serial No. 201280039703.4, Office Action mailed May 28, 2015”, (W/ English Translation), 12 pgs.
“European Application Serial No. 06840269.2, Response filed Mar. 23, 2015 to Examination Notification Art. 94(3) mailed Nov. 12, 2014”, 10 pgs.
“European Application Serial No. 06840269.2, Response filed Aug. 4, 2014 to Examination Notification Art. 94(3) mailed Jan. 24, 2014”, 10 pgs.
“International Application Serial No. PCT/US2006/062117, International Preliminary Report on Patentability mailed on Jun. 18, 2008”, 5 pgs.
“International Application Serial No. PCT/US2006/062117, Written Opinion mailed on Apr. 5, 2007”, 4 pgs.
“U.S. Appl. No. 13/459,060, Notice of Allowance mailed Dec. 7, 2015”, 7 pgs.
“U.S. Appl. No. 14/845,522, Preliminary Amendment filed Sep. 24, 2015”, 7 pgs.
1 “Canadian Application Serial No. 2,641,966, Office Action mailed Sep. 4, 2015”, 4 pgs.
“Chinese Application Serial No. 201280039703.4, Response filed Sep. 7, 2015 to Office Action mailed May 28, 2015”, (W/ English Translation), 72 pgs.
U.S. Appl. No. 14/845,522, filed Sep. 4, 2015, Femoral Prosthesis With Medicalized Patellar Groove.
“U.S. Appl. No. 13/459,060, PTO Response to Rule 312 Communication mailed Mar. 3, 2016”, 2 pgs.
“U.S. Appl. No. 14/845,522, Non Final Office Action mailed Jun. 1, 2016”, 11 pgs.
“U.S. Appl. No. 15/092,107, Preliminary Amendment filed Apr. 7, 2016”, 11 pgs.
“Australian Application Serial No. 2013245552, First Examiner Report mailed Mar. 30, 2016”, 4 pgs.
“Chinese Application Serial No. 201280039703.4, Response filed May 31, 2016 to Office Action mailed May 10, 2016”, (W/ English Translation), 34 pgs.
“European Application Serial No. 06840269.2, Decision to Grant mailed Feb. 18, 2016”, 3 pgs.
“European Application Serial No. 06840269.2, Office Action mailed Sep. 8, 2015”, 67 pgs.

Related Publications (1)

	Number	Date	Country
	20070260323 A1	Nov 2007	US

Provisional Applications (2)

	Number	Date	Country
	60750613	Dec 2005	US
	60805933	Jun 2006	US

Distal femoral knee prostheses

Information

Patent Number

Date Filed

Date Issued

Inventors

Original Assignees

Examiners

Agents

CPC

Field of Search

US

CPC

International Classifications

Term Extension

Abstract