Catalog Number 497.261 |
Device Problem
Migration or Expulsion of Device (1395)
|
Patient Problems
Failure of Implant (1924); Pain (1994)
|
Event Date 12/19/2014 |
Event Type
Injury
|
Event Description
|
Device report from synthes (b)(4) reports an event in (b)(6) as follows: it was reported that the fall of the veptr hook occurred.Following the previous surgery to carry out the replacement of the veptr implant, the patient started complaining of pains post-operatively.Although the pain totally disappeared later by the time when the patient had visited the hospital afterwards, it transpired that the lamina hook had been migrating to the l4 area from the l3.The surgeon has surmised that the hook had fallen because of undue physical stress of veptr.Allegedly, the patient is not in pain currently after having experienced unknown pains for about 3 consecutive days.Another revision is due to take place on (b)(6) 2015, in an attempt to perform screw fixation after removing the hook on the lumber vertebra side.The dislocated hook seems to have migrated to somewhere between the bones, but fortunately now the patient is in stable condition.Even so, the patient is still under close observation for the upcoming surgery.This report is 1 of 1 for (b)(4).
|
|
Event Description
|
This is report 1 of 4 for (b)(4).
|
|
Manufacturer Narrative
|
Device was used for treatment, not diagnosis.Without a lot number the device history record review and the investigation could not be completed; no conclusion could be drawn, as no product was received.If information is obtained that was not available for the initial medwatch, a follow-up medwatch will be filed as appropriate.
|
|
Manufacturer Narrative
|
A review of the device history records has been requested.Device was used for treatment, not diagnosis.If information is obtained that was not available for the initial medwatch, a follow-up medwatch will be filed as appropriate.
|
|
Manufacturer Narrative
|
Additional narrative: subject device has been received and is currently in the evaluation process.Device was used for treatment, not diagnosis.If information is obtained that was not available for the initial medwatch, a follow-up medwatch will be filed as appropriate.
|
|
Manufacturer Narrative
|
Additional narrative: patient identifier and weight are unknown.Device used for treatment, not diagnosis.If information is obtained that was not available for the initial medwatch, a follow-up medwatch will be filed as appropriate.
|
|
Manufacturer Narrative
|
A manufacturing investigation was performed for the subject device (part number 497.261, ti offset lamina hook low profile-left, lot number 7773245).The subject device was received with visible scratches, marring, and discolored and/or missing anodite on the various surfaces of the part.These features were observed during a macroscopic examination under laboratory lighting and were determined to be indicative of post manufacturing use and/or explant.The subject device features were evaluated and measured to verify the device dimensions were within the specifications depicted on the associated product drawings.The results of verification of all potentially relevant features found that all features were manufactured to be within the specified limits.Therefore, there is no objective evidence supporting the notion that manufacturing of the reported product is relevant to the complaint condition reported as¿ implant failure postoperatively: migrated.¿ the root cause of the complaint condition could not be identified based on the reported information and the investigation of the returned device.If information is obtained that was not available for the initial medwatch, a follow-up medwatch will be filed as appropriate.
|
|
Manufacturer Narrative
|
A review of the device history record(s) of the reported product lot, sub-components, and raw material from which it was produced showed that there were no nonconformities reported for the raw material or during the manufacture of the reported product lot that would contribute to the complaint condition reported as implant failure postoperatively.If information is obtained that was not available for the initial medwatch, a follow-up medwatch will be filed as appropriate.
|
|
Search Alerts/Recalls
|