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

MAUDE Adverse Event Report: APIFIX LTD. MID-C 125; POSTERIOR RATCHETING ROD SYSTEM

  • 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
 

APIFIX LTD. MID-C 125; POSTERIOR RATCHETING ROD SYSTEM Back to Search Results
Model Number MID-C 125
Device Problem Break (1069)
Patient Problem Failure of Implant (1924)
Event Date 03/07/2023
Event Type  malfunction  
Event Description
On (b)(6) 2023, apifix was notified that patient (b)(6) (pas #091-a005) has a broken implant.2 year follow-up x-rays showed implant breakage at end of way.The patient, a high level gymnast, was asymptomatic, no pain.
 
Manufacturer Narrative
Production process analysis: a review of the device history record confirmed that the device was manufactured and tested according to relevant procedures, and shipped according to manufacturer's specifications.User (surgeon and patient) information analysis: on (b)(6) 2023, apifix was notified that patient (b)(6) (pas #091-a005) has a broken implant.2 year follow-up x-rays showed implant breakage at its 'end of way'.The patient, a high level gymnast, was asymptomatic, no pain.The patient is reported to have grown 2 inches and gained 25 lbs.Implant breakage can result from trauma, practicing contact or high demand sports, hyper-kyphosis.Inserting the pedicle screws in a wrong trajectory which locks the poly-axial joints, not working according to the surgical technique (e.G., minimally invasive approach and/or not using the trial tool properly).The risk for breakage due to the above increases when the implant reaches its maximal elongation.Reoperation events are a known risk that was assessed and recorded by the product risk management file.The risk of broken rod has been assessed and found to be acceptable.The current implant breakage rate due to any reason is in line with the rate reported in the literature for this type of complication as described in the company's cer (clinical evaluation report).The risk has been quantified, characterized, and documented as acceptable within a full risk assessment.On (b)(6) 2023, it was reported that the patient is having no pain or issues and wants to put off surgery for now.  they are following up in the summer to discuss removal/revision options.Once additional relevant details become available, a supplemental report will be submitted.
 
Manufacturer Narrative
Additional information: on (b)(6) 2023 patient #(b)(6) underwent implant removal. 'patient (b)(6) was seen on (b)(6) 2023 by dr.(b)(6) for her two year follow up.At presentation patient reported no pain and everything appeared normal.During the appointment, as is standard, an x-ray was performed.The x-ray showed the apifix device was fractured.After speaking with the patient and guardians, it was decided that the apifix device would be removed and not replaced.The patient had the device removed on (b)(6) 2023.No report of patient pain/complications was received.The explanted device is expected to be returned to the manufacturer and will be evaluated.Following the evaluation, once new information comes to light, a supplemental medwatch report will be submitted.
 
Manufacturer Narrative
Return analysis: the explanted device was returned and was subjected to cleaning, steam sterilizing, and engineering evaluation.The device was fractured near the mid-point of the pole.The fracture mode is unknown because the fracture plane was worn smooth, removing indicators of fracture type.The fracture plane and external surfaces were worn, indicating that the device remained implanted for some time post fracture event.The wear analysis portion of retrieval and analysis protocol (b)(4) was not conducted because the cause of failure was obvious, device fracture.
 
Search Alerts/Recalls

  New Search  |  Submit an Adverse Event Report

Brand Name
MID-C 125
Type of Device
POSTERIOR RATCHETING ROD SYSTEM
Manufacturer (Section D)
APIFIX LTD.
1 hacarmel st.
kochav yokneam bldg
yokneam ellit, 20692 07
IS  2069207
Manufacturer (Section G)
APIFIX LTD.
1 hacarmel st.
kochav yokneam bldg
yokneam ellit, 20692 07
IS   2069207
Manufacturer Contact
alan vaisman
1 hacarmel st.
kochav yokneam bldg
yokneam ellit, 20692-07
IS   2069207
MDR Report Key16663348
MDR Text Key313166869
Report Number3013461531-2023-00009
Device Sequence Number1
Product Code QGP
UDI-Device Identifier07290018128046
UDI-Public07290018128046
Combination Product (y/n)N
Reporter Country CodeUS
PMA/PMN Number
H170001
Number of Events Reported1
Summary Report (Y/N)N
Report Source Manufacturer
Source Type User Facility
Reporter Occupation Administrator/Supervisor
Type of Report Initial,Followup,Followup
Report Date 11/20/2023
1 Device was Involved in the Event
1 Patient was Involved in the Event
Is this an Adverse Event Report? No
Is this a Product Problem Report? Yes
Device Operator Health Professional
Device Model NumberMID-C 125
Device Catalogue NumberMUS-125-050
Device Lot NumberAF-02-004-20
Initial Date Manufacturer Received 03/07/2023
Initial Date FDA Received04/03/2023
Supplement Dates Manufacturer Received03/07/2023
03/07/2023
Supplement Dates FDA Received07/06/2023
11/20/2023
Was Device Evaluated by Manufacturer? Yes
Date Device Manufactured03/10/2020
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 Age13 YR
Patient SexFemale
-
-