Subject was included in the randomized control group; synthes is unable to precisely determine the manufacturer of their spine system implants.There were four (4) pedicle systems that were identified and approved in the study protocol for use as the control; however, no synthes manufactured products were referenced.Synthes did market a pedicle system at the time and the surgeon could have utilized this product.(b)(6).This report is for an unknown spine pedicle system/unknown lot.Part and lot numbers are unknown; udi number is unknown.Without a lot number the device history records review could not be completed.The investigation could not be completed; no conclusion could be drawn, as no product was received.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.
|
It was reported (b)(6) clinical study patient id (b)(6) was implanted with an unknown spine pedicle system at l4-5, l5-s1.Subject (b)(6) had a history of degenerative disc disease at l4-5, l5-s1.The patient was enrolled in the (b)(6) study and was randomized to the control group.The patient underwent anterior lumbar interbody fusion at levels l4-5, l5-s1 on (b)(6) 2003.The patient was evaluated postoperatively at 3 months and 24 months.The patient was non-compliant with the protocol and missed the following post-operative visits: 6 weeks, 6 months, 12 months and 18 months.Following the 24 months visit, the patient developed progression right sided leg pain, weakness and decreased sensation.The patient underwent hardware removal and right foraminotomy on (b)(6) 2006.Postoperatively, the patient was neurologically intact with some decreased sensation in the lower medical foot as he had preoperatively.The ae-crf form reports: likelihood of event was anticipated.Severity of event was severe - incapacitating, unable to perform, interfere with daily activities.Action required was hospitalization with surgery.Implant involvement was none.Course of action taken: on (b)(6) 2006, patient underwent l4-s1 hardware removal with revision decompression; right l4-l5.Subject had pain management consult.Impairment was reported as none.Investigator reported the event was definitely related to the type of surgery.Investigator reported the event was definitely not related to the implants.Current state of event was reportedly resolved.This report is for an unknown spine pedicle system.This is report 1 of 1 for (b)(4).
|