It was reported that, after a primary uka performed on (b)(6) 2023, the patient presented an infection.A revision surgery was performed on (b)(6) 2024 to solve the issue.The wound was washed and debrided thoroughly.The insert did not have any visible defects, but it was explanted and replaced for another s+n insert of the same size.The patient current health status is currently unknown.
|
H3, h6: the explanted insert was not returned and, given the nature of the alleged incident, the femoral component and tibial baseplate could not be returned for evaluation; therefore, a device analysis could not be performed.The clinical/medical investigation concluded that, per complaint details, a revision/insert exchange was performed approximately 4 months post implantation due to infection.Reportedly, the insert was exchanged and wound washed thoroughly/joint debridement performed.Primary insert implant reportedly did not have any visible defects or faults.It was communicated that the medical documentation along with the patient's current health status is either ¿unknown or not available¿.Without the requested medical documentation, no contributing clinical factors were identified.The patient impact beyond the reported infection at approximately 4 months post operation with subsequent revision/insert exchange cannot be determined, although a brief post surgical healing phase with possible antibiotic therapy would be anticipated.A review of the production orders did not reveal a manufacturing abnormality that could have caused or contributed to the reported incident.A review of complaint history for the part numbers over the past 12 months and for the batch numbers based on historical data of the devices did not reveal similar events for the listed devices.A review of the instructions for use documents for knee systems revealed that acute post-surgical wound infection has been identified in possible adverse effects.Active, local infection or previous intra-articular infections are identified in contraindications for total knee replacement.A review of the risk management files revealed this failure mode was previously identified.The anticipated risk level is still adequate.A historical review concluded that there are no prior actions related to this products and event.A review of the sterilization records revealed the batches were sterilized within normal parameters.At this time, we have no evidence to conclude that the products failed to meet any specifications at the time of manufacture.Factors that could contribute to the reported event include loss of sterility during procedure, post-operative healing issue, injury, patient condition and/or medical history.Based on this investigation, the need for corrective action is not indicated.Should the devices or additional information be received, the complaint will be reopened.No further investigation is warranted for this complaint; however, we will continue to monitor for future complaints and investigate as necessary.We consider this investigation closed.
|