It was reported that the patient had a subtrochanteric femur fracture and underwent a right femur intramedullary nailing on (b)(6) 2017.He subsequently developed a nonunion with hardware failure.The patient broke through the hole of the lag screw proximally at that time and underwent a revision surgery on (b)(6) 2018 (it is unknown if it was a s+n device).He was implanted an intertan nail.However, after a few years, the patient was complaining of pain due to a broken hardware of intramedullary nail proximally and a broken distal interlocking screw distally.The patient underwent another revision and was implanted with competitor's devices.
|
The device, used in treatment, was not returned for evaluation, therefore the failure could not be confirmed.The clinical/medical team concluded, although the office report provided by surgeon reported, the patient was complaining of pain, two years and three months post revision.The x-ray report indicated there was breakage of the im nail proximally and a broken distal interlocking screw distally.However, without the x-ray images, or other relevant medical information we are unable to confirm the reported adverse event.Per report, the surgeon plans to schedule the patient for an operative removal of the nail and a replacement of the im nail.Therefore, no further clinical/medical assessment is warranted at this time.Should additional medical information be provided, this complaint will be re-assessed.At this time, we have no reason to suspect that the products failed to meet any product specifications at the time of manufacture.Factors and/or some potential probable causes that could contribute to the reported event have been identified as overuse or excessive pressure on the joint, injury, infection and/or patient condition.Should additional information be received, the complaint will be reopened.No further investigation warranted for this complaint; however we will continue to monitor for future complaints and investigate as necessary.We consider this investigation closed.
|