Model Number PDL-L-PT10S |
Device Problem
Adverse Event Without Identified Device or Use Problem (2993)
|
Patient Problem
Multiple Fractures (4519)
|
Event Date 02/29/2024 |
Event Type
Injury
|
Event Description
|
Patient was implanted with a prodisc l device at the l5/s1 level on (b)(6) 2023.Following the implantation surgery, the patient was found to have bilateral pars fractures at the index level.The patient is not experiencing any symptoms.The surgeon has determined that the patient will wear a brace and be re-evaluated in four months time.
|
|
Manufacturer Narrative
|
An mdr is indicated for this complaint.Patient was implanted with a prodisc l device at the l5/s1 level on (b)(6) 2023.Following the implantation surgery, the patient was found to have bilateral pars fractures at the index level.The patient is not experiencing any symptoms.The surgeon has determined that the patient will wear a brace and be re-evaluated in four months time.A review of the dhrs found no anomalies associated with the complaint.Complaint trending found that the rate of complaints is within the level defined in the risk documentation.A review of the risk documentation found that the hazards associated with the complaint are identified and mitigated to a level where the clinical benefits outweigh the risks.There are no previous issues or capas associated with the complaint.The pdl device remains implanted within the patient, therefore no device evaluation could be completed.Bracing was needed for the bilateral pars fractures.A cause for the fractures is unknown, and no anomalies were identified during the course of the investigation.The submission is 2 of 3 devices involved in this event.
|
|
Event Description
|
Complaint is a follow-up to mdr 2024-00006.Patient was implanted with a prodisc l device at the l5/s1 level on (b)(6) 2023.Following the implantation surgery, the patient was found to have bilateral pars fractures at the index level.The patient is not experiencing any symptoms.The surgeon has determined that the patient will wear a brace and be re-evaluated in four months time.One month into bracing the decision was made to remove the pdl implant.Removal was completed on (b)(6) 2024.Patient was revised to alif with posterior fixation screws.
|
|
Manufacturer Narrative
|
An mdr is indicated for this complaint.Complaint is a follow-up to (b)(4).Patient was implanted with a prodisc l device at the l5/s1 level on (b)(6) 2023.Following the implantation surgery, the patient was found to have bilateral pars fractures at the index level.The patient is not experiencing any symptoms.The surgeon has determined that the patient will wear a brace and be re-evaluated in four months time.One month into bracing the decision was made to remove the pdl implant.Removal was completed on (b)(6) 2024.Patient was revised to alif with posterior fixation screws.A review of the dhrs found no anomalies associated with the complaint.Complaint trending found that the rate of complaints is within the level defined in the risk documentation.A review of the risk documentation found that the hazards associated with the complaint are identified and mitigated to a level where the clinical benefits outweigh the risks.The prodisc l device was returned and will be evaluated under exponent's approved device evaluation protocol.The evaluation will be recorded under report number (b)(4).The removal was completed due to the bilateral pars fractures.A cause for the fractures is unknown, and no anomalies were identified during the course of the complaint investigation.The submission is 2 of 3 devices involved in this event.
|
|
Search Alerts/Recalls
|