Lewold, s., goodman, s., knutson, k., robertson, o., and lidgren, l.(1995).Oxford meniscal bearing knee versus the marmor knee in unicompartmental arthroplasty for arthrosis.The journal of arthroplasty, 10(6), 722-731.Doi:10.1016/s0883-5403(05)80066-x.The product was not available for return.Without the opportunity to examine the complaint product, root cause cannot be determined.Part and lot identification are necessary for review of device history records and complaint history, neither were provided.Risks associated with reported condition are addressed through the warnings in the package insert as a part of design control risk management.If any further information is found which would change or alter any conclusions or information, a supplemental will be filed accordingly.Zimmer biomet will continue to monitor for trends.(b)(4).
|
Information was received based on review of a journal article entitled, "oxford meniscal bearing knee versus the marmor knee in unicompartmental arthroplasty for arthrosis.A swedish multicenter survival study" lewold, s.Et al.The journal of arthroplasty vol.10 no.6 1995.This complaint pertains to a patient who had a fourth reoperation following multiple closed reduction procedures.At this time, all components were removed and replaced with a total knee system.The date of the procedure is unknown.
|