Traditional joint implants are known in the art.  For example, one of the most common types of joint prosthetic devices is a knee implant including a femoral component and a tibial component.  Other joint implants are associated with, for example, the hip and shoulder. 
Implantation of traditional prosthetic devices is usually associated with loss of underlying tissue and bone.  With some devices, serious long-term complications associated with the loss of significant amount of tissue and bone can include infection, osteolysis and also loosening of the implant.  Such joint arthroplasties can be highly invasive and require surgical resection of the entire, or a majority of the, articular surface of one or more bones involved in the repair.  Typically with these procedures, the marrow space is fairly extensively reamed in order to fit the stem of the prosthesis within the bone.  Reaming results in a loss of a patient's bone stock and over time subsequent osteolysis can frequently lead to loosening of the prosthesis.  Further, the area where the implant and the bone mate degrades over time requiring the prosthesis to eventually be replaced.  Since the patient's bone stock is limited, the number of possible replacement surgeries also is limited for joint arthroplasty.  In short, over the course of fifteen to twenty years, and in some cases even shorter time periods, the patient can run out of therapeutic options ultimately resulting in a painful, non-functional joint. 
Moreover, currently available traditional implants can be misaligned with a patient's anatomical structures and thereby jeopardize the resultant joint congruity.  Poor alignment and poor joint congruity can, for example, lead to instability of the joint.  Further, traditional implant solutions do not take into account the fact that roughly 80% of patients undergoing knee surgery have a healthy lateral compartment and only need to repair the medial condyle and the patella.  An additional 10% only have damage to the lateral condyle.  Thus, 90% of patients do not require the entire condylar surface repaired. 
Thus, there is a need for joint implants and systems that integrate with a patient's anatomical structures.  In particular, there is a need for implants and implant systems that take into account the patient-specific damage to be repaired and minimizes bone loss due to implantation requirements.  Moreover, there is a need for implants and implant systems that provide an improved functional joint and improve the anatomic result of the joint correction procedure by providing surfaces that more closely resemble, or optimize, the joint anatomy of a patient.