The reported event could be confirmed, since x-rays were provided for evaluation.A review of the x-rays by the medical expert confirmed the alleged failure.The opinion of the medical expert was requested and stated as following: ¿the device was used as indicated.There was however a concession made by the surgeon to make sure that the prosthesis was supported sufficiently by bone circumferentially at the metaphysis-stem junction.The user took a risk leaving the prosthesis unsupported by bone circumferentially at the metaphysis-stem junction.This has put this junction under high stresses and at risk for the reported assembly screw breakage leading to component disassembly.¿ a review of the device history was not possible because the lot number was not communicated.No corrective actions are required at this time.A review of the labeling did not indicate any abnormalities.Indications of material, manufacturing, or design related problems were unable to be identified as the lot number was not communicated.Based on the available x-ray and formal medical opinion the probable root cause was attributed to be a user related error.If the device is returned or if any additional information is provided, the investigation will be reassessed.¿ h3 other text : device not returned.
|