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: patient (b)(6) index procedure was performed on (b)(6) 2021.On (b)(6) 2023 apifix was notified that patient (b)(6) underwent revision surgery at (b)(6) hospital on (b)(6) 2023 due to implant breakage.According to the reporter, "the patient's current 115mm mid-c max distracted and broke.We replaced with a 125mm mid-c and did not change fixation levels".Risk assessment: 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.Upon return of the implant, a failure analysis will be conducted.When further relevant information is identified with which to determine a cause, the complaint file will be updated and a supplemental medwatch will be filed.
|