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) had a broken implant.Implant was removed and patient was converted to fusion on (b)(6) 2023.Per the implant retrieval form, the patient had a broken device in conjunction with pain off and on with activities.Patient is an avid tennis player.Grade i metalosis was identified during the removal; however the surgeon decided not to obtain a biopsy based on his/her medical discretion upon visualization of the tissue.The surgeon decided a biopsy was not necessary as there was no concerning tissue nor signs of infection.The patient's bone quality was assessed as 'excellent', and the surgical site at the time of removal was described as 'wound fully healed (clean, dry, intact).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.The explanted device is being returned to the manufacturer and will be evaluated.Following the evaluation, if new pertinent information comes to light, then a supplemental medwatch report will be submitted.
|
Return analysis: the explanted device was returned to orthopediatrics in warsaw, in and was subjected to cleaning, steam sterilizing, and engineering evaluation.No significant wear was observed on the spherical rings.The fracture of the device appeared to be fatique and the suspected origin site is at the base of the pocket where the weld ball is contained.Some material deformation was noted, likely due repeatedly reaching end of the travel permitted by the polyaxial joint.Apifix is closing this complaint at this time, but will continue to monitor this 'failure mode'; complaint trending will continue to monitor per post marketing surveillance procedure.
|