Kinectiv neck options let you outfit your patients with a personalized hip fit.

Restoring leg length, joint stability, and range of motion involve distinct surgical challenges. The Zimmer® M/L Taper Hip Prosthesis with Kinectiv® Technology is a system of modular stem and neck components designed to help the surgeon restore the natural hip joint center intraoperatively by addressing leg length, offset, and version independently to uniquely fit the hip to each patient.

View all online case studies

Leg Length Varus Anatomy Valgus Anatomy Version

Science of Kinectiv Technology

Design Rationale Performance Evaluation of Kinectiv Technology


Independent adjustment for intraoperative flexibility

Kinectiv Technology allows for intraoperative offset adjustment without affecting leg length and vice versa. Leg length discrepancy is a leading source of patient dissatisfaction.1-4 Proper leg length and offset restoration improve total hip replacement function and minimize the risk of dislocation and limp. 5-6

The Zimmer M/L Taper Hip Prosthesis with Kinectiv Technology allows independent version adjustments after stem implantation without compromising stem orientation. This facilitates optimal stem position based on the patient’s proximal femoral anatomy.

View Offset Animation View Leg Length Animation View Version Animation


Fits a wide array of patient anatomies

Research has shown high variability in head height, offset and version among patients.7-9 Although the most profound differences can be appreciated between men and women, there is much variation among all patients.

View Head Center Cluster Animation


The multiple neck options and broad range of head centers help surgeons efficiently target a wide range of anatomies to precisely fit the implant to each patient.

This chart shows neck implant distribution for over 25,000 consecutive cases. The head center location is outside that provided by typical fixed-neck stems over 50% of the time.10

Distribution of neck sales

References: 

  1. Konveys A, Bannister GC. The importance of leg length discrepancy after total hip arthroplasty. J Bone Joint Surg (Br). 2005;87-B:155-157.
  2. Hoffmann AA, Skrzynski MC. Leg length inequality and nerve palsy in total hip arthroplasty: a lawyer awaits! Orthopedics. 2000;9:943-944.
  3. White AB. AAOS committee on professional liability: study of 119 closed malpractice claims involving hip replacement. AAOS Bulletin. July 1994.
  4. Bal BS. Managing litigation risk in minimally invasive total joint surgery. AAOS Bulletin. April 2006.
  5. Iorio R, Healy WL, Warren PD, Appleby D. Lateral trochanteric pain following primary total hip arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty. 2006;21:233-236.
  6. Bourne RB, Rorabeck CH. Soft tissue balancing the hip. J Arthroplasty . 2002;17(suppl 1):17-22.
  7. Maruyama M, Feinberg JR, Capello WN, D’Antonio JA. Morphologic Features of the Acetabulum and Femur. Clinical Orthop 393:52-65, 2001.
  8. Data on File at Zimmer, Inc.  University of Tennessee Center for Musculoskeletal Research. Femoral Bone Atlas.
  9. Sugano N, Noble PC, and Kamaric E. Predicting the position of the femoral head center. Journal of Arthroplasty 14:102-107, 1999.
  10. Data on file at Zimmer