• Decrease font size
  • Return font size to normal
  • Increase font size
U.S. Department of Health and Human Services

MAUDE Adverse Event Report: STRYKER ORTHOPAEDICS-MAHWAH RESTORATION ADM X3 INS 28/52; PROSTHESIS, HIP, SEMI-CONSTRAINED, UNCEMENTED, METAL/POLYMER, NON-POROUS, CALICU

  • Print
  • Share
  • E-mail
-
Super Search Devices@FDA
510(k) | DeNovo | Registration & Listing | Adverse Events | Recalls | PMA | HDE | Classification | Standards
CFR Title 21 | Radiation-Emitting Products | X-Ray Assembler | Medsun Reports | CLIA | TPLC
 

STRYKER ORTHOPAEDICS-MAHWAH RESTORATION ADM X3 INS 28/52; PROSTHESIS, HIP, SEMI-CONSTRAINED, UNCEMENTED, METAL/POLYMER, NON-POROUS, CALICU Back to Search Results
Model Number 1236-2-852
Device Problem Fracture (1260)
Patient Problem Insufficient Information (4580)
Event Date 05/17/2021
Event Type  Injury  
Manufacturer Narrative
Should additional information become available it will be reported in a supplemental report upon completion of the investigation.H3 other text : not returned to the manufacturer.
 
Event Description
It was reported that the patient's hip was revised due to the adm/ mdm poly having broken in half.Rep confirmed that the patient's hip construct was: competitor shell, adm/ mdm poly insert (no mdm liner), competitor femoral head, competitor stem.
 
Event Description
It was reported that the patient's hip was revised due to the adm/ mdm poly having broken in half.Rep confirmed that the patient's hip construct was: competitor shell, adm/ mdm poly insert (no mdm liner), competitor femoral head, competitor stem.
 
Manufacturer Narrative
An event regarding crack/fracture involving a adm liner was reported.The event was confirmed via evaluation of the returned device.Method & results: product evaluation and results: visual inspection: visual inspection of the returned device indicated that the device has fractured into 2 pieces.Material analysis: a material analysis was performed and concluded the following: "the uhmwpe poly insert device fractured from overloading.The hackles seen are indications of this fracture mode when seen in uhmwpe.No material non-conformances, nor manufacturing defects were found on any surfaces inspected during the investigation." clinician review: a review of the provided medical information by a clinical consultant indicated: "the event description states: ".Hip was revised due to the adm/mdm poly having broken in half.Competitor shell, adm/mdm poly insert (no mdm liner), competitor femoral head, competitor stem." undated x-ray : ap left hip - uncemented tha, distal stem not visualized, reduced, head concentric but not deeply in acetabular component.1/13/17 x-rays: ap and lat left hip - same tha, head eccentric and deeper in acetabular component, distal stem not visualized.5/17/21 "operative report - left revision tha.Fracture of adm shell.The adm shell was fractured in 2 large pieces.No visible damage to acetabular shell.Adm 52 cup.28/0 biolox head." uncomplicated surgery briefly described.No clinical or pmh, no patient demographics, no dated serial x-rays, no list of implanted components, no examination of explanted components.While the revision operative report of 5/17/21 appears to confirm the event description, insufficient data is presented to create a medical report for this case." -product history review: review of the device history records indicate devices were manufactured and accepted into final stock with no relevant reported discrepancies.-complaint history review: there have been no other similar events for the lot referenced.Conclusions: it was reported that the patient was revised due to fracture of the adm poly liner.Visual inspection of the returned device indicated that the device has fractured into 2 pieces.A material analysis was performed and concluded the following: "the uhmwpe poly insert device fractured from overloading.The hackles seen are indications of this fracture mode when seen in uhmwpe.No material non-conformances, nor manufacturing defects were found on any surfaces inspected during the investigation." it was further reported that the adm poly liner was used with a competitor shell and competitor femoral head.A review of the adm x3 mobile bearing hip system surgical protocol indicated the following: "do not substitute another manufacturer¿s device for any component of the adm acetabular system." it is possible that the usage of the device in this off-label manner contributed to the device failure.No further investigation for this event is possible at this time.If additional information becomes available to indicate further evaluation is warranted, this record will be reopened.
 
Search Alerts/Recalls

  New Search  |  Submit an Adverse Event Report

Brand Name
RESTORATION ADM X3 INS 28/52
Type of Device
PROSTHESIS, HIP, SEMI-CONSTRAINED, UNCEMENTED, METAL/POLYMER, NON-POROUS, CALICU
Manufacturer (Section D)
STRYKER ORTHOPAEDICS-MAHWAH
325 corporate drive
mahwah NJ 07430
Manufacturer (Section G)
STRYKER ORTHOPAEDICS-CORK
ida industrial estate
carrigtwohill NA
EI   NA
Manufacturer Contact
brad curtis
325 corporate drive
mahwah, NJ 07430
2018315000
MDR Report Key11972847
MDR Text Key255761799
Report Number0002249697-2021-01002
Device Sequence Number1
Product Code MEH
UDI-Device Identifier04546540638991
UDI-Public04546540638991
Combination Product (y/n)N
Reporter Country CodeUS
PMA/PMN Number
K093644
Number of Events Reported1
Summary Report (Y/N)N
Report Source Manufacturer
Source Type Other,Health Professional
Reporter Occupation Physician
Type of Report Initial,Followup
Report Date 11/10/2022
1 Device was Involved in the Event
1 Patient was Involved in the Event
Is this an Adverse Event Report? Yes
Is this a Product Problem Report? No
Device Operator Health Professional
Device Expiration Date02/05/2021
Device Model Number1236-2-852
Device Catalogue Number1236-2-852
Device Lot Number54677601
Was Device Available for Evaluation? Device Returned to Manufacturer
Is the Reporter a Health Professional? Yes
Initial Date Manufacturer Received 05/17/2021
Initial Date FDA Received06/10/2021
Supplement Dates Manufacturer Received10/18/2022
Supplement Dates FDA Received11/10/2022
Was Device Evaluated by Manufacturer? Yes
Date Device Manufactured02/06/2016
Is the Device Single Use? Yes
Is This a Reprocessed and Reused Single-Use Device? No
Type of Device Usage Initial
Patient Sequence Number1
Patient Outcome(s) Hospitalization; Required Intervention;
Patient Age59 YR
Patient SexFemale
-
-