It was reported that after a right tka performed on (b)(6) 2018 due to osteoarthritis, the patient experienced unexplained pain.This was addressed via revision surgery on (b)(6) 2019 were all components where exchange to competitor´s implants.This information was provided by the national joint registry of the united kingdom, as part of a retrospective data collection of patients who underwent a revision surgery of journey uni prothesis.As such, no further information will be available.
|
H3, h6: the device was not returned for evaluation and the reported event could not be confirmed.The clinical/medical investigation concluded that, per complaint details, a right revision was performed approximately 15 months post uka due to unexplained pain.As of the date of this medical investigation, the requested clinical documentation has not been provided as the information was provided by the national joint registry of the united kingdom as part of a retrospective data collection, and reportedly, no further information will be available.Without the requested medical documentation, possible clinical factors which could have contributed to the reported event could not be definitively concluded.The patient impact beyond the reported pain and revision could not be confirmed nor concluded.No further medical assessment can be rendered at this time.A review of the manufacturing records did not reveal a manufacturing abnormality that could have caused or contributed to the reported incident.A review of complaint history revealed similar events for the listed device over the previous 12 months, but no similar events for the batch based on the historical data, this failure mode will be monitored for future complaints for any necessary corrective actions.A review of the instructions for use documents for knee systems revealed that improper fixation, and/or migration of the components could cause possible adverse effects.Also, the warnings and precautions section establish that the implant can become damaged as a result of strenuous activity or trauma.The patient should be warned of surgical risks, and made aware of possible adverse effects.A review of the risk management file revealed this failure mode was previously identified.The anticipated risk level is still adequate.A historical review concluded that there are no prior actions related to this product and event.At this time, we have no reason to suspect that the product failed to meet any product specifications at the time of manufacture.Factors that could contribute to the reported event include traumatic injury, joint tightness, patient condition or postoperative care.The contribution of the device to the reported event could not be corroborated.Based on this investigation, the need for corrective action is not indicated.Without the return of the actual product involved, our investigation could not proceed.Should the device or additional information be received, the complaint will be reopened.No further investigation is warranted for this complaint; however, we will continue to monitor for future complaints and investigate as necessary.We consider this investigation closed.Internal complaint reference number: (b)(4).
|