Corrected data: d4 (model number and lot number), d8, h6 (health impact and clinical codes) device evaluation: upon return, visual inspection of the returned product revealed the distraction rod component had visible discoloration at its junction with the housing tube component.The device's work order was reviewed and confirmed the device passed all inspections per the acceptance tests, which indicated the rod was manufactured per specified requirements and met all the required quality inspections prior shipment.The device was subsequently sent for third party analysis.Third party evaluation: qualitative assessment of the reported corrosion damage on the implant was assessed via scanning electron microscopy (sem) and chemical energy dispersive x-ray (edx) analysis of the implant surface and debris.Despite initial indication of substantial implant corrosion and corrosion debris, only mild evidence of wear/corrosion (i.E.Fretting, pitting and crevice) associated with the implant components was found at the junction of the distraction rod and housing tube, and no clearly identifiable wear or corrosion was observed on other areas of the implant.Instead, it was found there was appreciable deposition of biologically derived/enhanced debris and carbon-based protein precipitates (not ti-o rich deposits as would be expected with ti-alloy corrosion).In total, this indicates only a minor amount of mechanically assisted corrosion occurred at the implant modular interface.Device records review: review of the device history records for the rod confirmed that it met all of the required quality inspection criteria prior to release.
|