As reported: "on (b)(6) 2024 we were scheduled for a retinacular repair and i&d of a right total knee arthroplasty.Upon exposure to the joint, dr.Noticed that the 6x10 tibia insert was "rocking" in the tibial tray.After inspection of the insert, it appeared as if it was correctly engaged to the tibial baseplate, however was still rocking posteriorly.We took note of this and assumed that soft tissue was preventing the tibial insert from fully locking into the baseplate.We proceeded forward with the explant of the device, upon which dr.Examined the explanted 6x10 insert.Here, he noticed two "bevels on the posterior aspects of the tibial insert.He expressed his concerns that he thought something wasn't correct.He continued with his soft tissue work, i&d, and we proceeded to trial for a new poly.Once we chose our new cs poly, he compared the two on the back table.It was here that we noticed a difference in the two implants.The new 6x12 cs insert did not have the "bevels" posteriorly like the explanted 6x10 cs did.We thought maybe it was damaged when initially implanted but the bevels were oddly symmetric on both the medial and lateral aspect of the implant.Upon implantation of the new 6x12 cs insert, the poly was stable and the proceeded to close.He believes the unstable 6x10 poly caused the patient pain/instability)." rep confirmed only the insert was revised.Surgeon would like to know if this issue has been reported previously.
|