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

MAUDE Adverse Event Report: SMITH & NEPHEW, INC. UNKNOWN CEMENTLESS PARTIAL KNEE IMPL; PROSTHESIS, KNEE, FEMOROTIBIAL, SEMI-CONSTRAINED, CEMENTED, METAL/POLYMER

  • 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
 

SMITH & NEPHEW, INC. UNKNOWN CEMENTLESS PARTIAL KNEE IMPL; PROSTHESIS, KNEE, FEMOROTIBIAL, SEMI-CONSTRAINED, CEMENTED, METAL/POLYMER Back to Search Results
Catalog Number UNKNOWN
Device Problem Adverse Event Without Identified Device or Use Problem (2993)
Patient Problems Arthralgia (2355); Inadequate Osseointegration (2646)
Event Type  Injury  
Event Description
It was reported that, after a uka had been performed on an unspecified date with an engage partial knee system, the patient experienced pain.A revision surgery was conducted to address the adverse event.Current health status is unknown.
 
Manufacturer Narrative
Complaint reference number: (b)(4).
 
Manufacturer Narrative
Section h3, h6: the device was not returned for evaluation; therefore, a device analysis could not be performed.The clinical/medical investigation concluded that, per case details, after a unicompartmental knee arthroplasty surgery was performed, the patient reportedly underwent revision of the engage partial knee system due to pain.As of the date of this medical investigation, the requested clinical documentation has not been provided; therefore, there were no clinical factors found which would have definitively contributed to the event.The patient impact beyond the reported pain with a subsequent revision cannot be determined and the patient¿s current health status is unknown.Therefore, no further clinical/medical assessment can be rendered.Device specific identifiers were not provided.Therefore, an evaluation of the manufacturing records and complaint history review could not be performed.A review of the instructions for use documents for engage partial knee system revealed that pain has been identified in the adverse effects and complications as a result from improper positioning, loosening or wear of the components.There is not enough data available to conclude that the overall clinical benefit outweighs the potential risk profile when compared to the state of the art.The existing data identifies a potential signal that the performance is an outlier vs the state of the art with respect to the risk for revision.In addition, a historical review concluded that no previous escalated actions for this type of issue were identified.However, as a correction action a voluntary market removal will be performed for the engage cementless partial knee system due recent complaint data that indicates that the revision rate may be trending higher than corresponding similar devices in global joint replacement registries.At this time, we have no reason to suspect that the product failed to meet any specifications at the time of manufacture.Factors that could contribute to the reported event include traumatic injury, joint tightness or patient condition.Based on this investigation, the need for corrective action may be indicated.
 
Manufacturer Narrative
B5 event description.
 
Event Description
It was reported that, after a right uka had been performed on (b)(6) 2021 with an engage partial knee system, the patient started to experience increased pain throughout physical therapy.Testing produced findings consistent with a broken cervical screw.Therefore, a revision surgery was conducted in 2023 to address this adverse event.Current health status of the plaintiff is unknown.
 
Manufacturer Narrative
H10: additional information in a1, a2, a3, a4, b7, d1, d2, d4, d6, g4.H11: corrected information in h6 (health effect - clinical code and health effect - impact code).
 
Manufacturer Narrative
H3, h6: the device was not returned for evaluation; therefore, a device analysis could not be performed.The clinical/medical investigation concluded that, based on the bone scan report, implant loosening or failure to achieve bony integration most likely caused the patient¿s pain; however, a definitive clinical root cause of lack of integration or loosening cannot be concluded.It is unknown how the alleged ¿broken cervical screw¿ is related to the partial knee system and subsequent bilateral revision/conversion to total knee arthroplasty.The patient impact includes the reported increased pain post-partial knee replacements (left side greater than right), medication, physical-therapy and the bilateral revisions/conversations to total knee arthroplasty within 1-2 years of implantation, as well as anticipated post-surgical restorative phases.The current patient status remains unknown and further patient impact cannot be determined.A review of the production order did not reveal a manufacturing abnormality that could have caused or contributed to the reported incident.A review of complaint history based on the historical data revealed a similar event for the listed batch, this failure mode will be monitored for future complaints for any necessary corrective actions.A review of the instructions for use documents for engage partial knee system revealed that pain has been identified in the adverse effects and complications as a result from improper positioning, loosening or wear of the components.There is not enough data available to conclude that the overall clinical benefit outweighs the potential risk profile when compared to the state of the art.The existing data identifies a potential signal that the performance is an outlier vs the state of the art with respect to the risk for revision.In addition, a historical review concluded that no previous escalated actions for this type of issue were identified.However, as a correction action a voluntary market removal will be performed for the engage cementless partial knee system due recent complaint data that indicates that the revision rate may be trending higher than corresponding similar devices in global joint replacement registries.At this time, we have no evidence to conclude that the product failed to meet any specifications at the time of manufacture.Factors that could contribute to the reported event include implant loosening, failure to achieve bony integration, traumatic injury, joint tightness or patient condition.Based on this investigation, the need for corrective action may be indicated.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.
 
Search Alerts/Recalls

  New Search  |  Submit an Adverse Event Report

Brand Name
UNKNOWN CEMENTLESS PARTIAL KNEE IMPL
Type of Device
PROSTHESIS, KNEE, FEMOROTIBIAL, SEMI-CONSTRAINED, CEMENTED, METAL/POLYMER
Manufacturer (Section D)
SMITH & NEPHEW, INC.
1450 brooks rd.
memphis TN 38116
Manufacturer (Section G)
SMITH & NEPHEW, INC.
1450 brooks rd.
memphis TN 38116
Manufacturer Contact
holly topping
7000 west william cannon drive
austin, TX 78735
5123913905
MDR Report Key16994421
MDR Text Key315862439
Report Number1020279-2023-01126
Device Sequence Number1
Product Code HRY
Combination Product (y/n)N
Reporter Country CodeUS
PMA/PMN Number
K190439
Number of Events Reported1
Summary Report (Y/N)N
Report Source Manufacturer
Source Type Health Professional,Company Representative
Reporter Occupation Physician
Remedial Action Recall
Type of Report Initial,Followup,Followup,Followup,Followup
Report Date 03/12/2024
2 Devices were Involved in the Event: 1   2  
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 Catalogue NumberUNKNOWN
Device Lot NumberUNKNOWN
Was Device Available for Evaluation? No
Is the Reporter a Health Professional? Yes
Initial Date Manufacturer Received 05/03/2023
Initial Date FDA Received05/24/2023
Supplement Dates Manufacturer Received06/22/2023
06/22/2023
02/26/2024
03/08/2024
Supplement Dates FDA Received06/26/2023
01/24/2024
02/28/2024
03/12/2024
Was Device Evaluated by Manufacturer? Device Not Returned to Manufacturer
Is the Device Single Use? Yes
Is This a Reprocessed and Reused Single-Use Device? No
Type of Device Usage Initial
Removal/Correction NumberZ-1670-2023
Patient Sequence Number1
Patient Outcome(s) Required Intervention;
Patient Age58 YR
Patient SexMale
Patient Weight96 KG
-
-