Device was used for treatment, not diagnosis.(b)(6).The subject device is not expected to be returned to the synthes manufacturer for evaluation.A device history record review was performed for the subject device lot.The review showed that there were no issues during the manufacture of the product that would contribute to this complaint condition.No non-conformances were generated during the production of the subject device.The investigation could not be completed; no conclusion could be drawn, as no product was received.A product development investigation has been requested.If information is obtained that was not available for the initial medwatch, a follow-up medwatch will be filed as appropriate.
|
Additional narrative: a manufacturing investigation action was conducted/performed.The report indicates that the: as the problem with the according peek psi only did show up after 5 years is a strong indication, that there was a soft tissue lesion that, may be caused by the grow of the patients anatomy around the implant while the peek psi did not grow, or by another, unknown external impact, that did compromise the peek psi and it¿s integrity within the surrounding bone.These are assumptions and cannot be confirmed based on the information we do have within this complaint, but it is a reasonable explanation for the situation described in the complaint.However, based on the signed images of approval, including the statement, ¿attention, be aware that an adolescent patient will grow whereas the psi will not! appropriate follow-up is therefore essential.¿ it is likely that the surgeon did an appropriate follow-up in order to prevent such effects in adolescent patients and if he detected them, he was able to take according measures.Based on the above discussed situation and based on the fact, that additional information is missing in order to evaluate the complaint further, no further actions are taken and the complaint will be closed as indeterminate.An investigation summary was attempted.The investigation of the complaint articles has shown that: product was not returned therefore an investigation could not be performed.Additional information is missing in order to evaluate.If information is obtained that was not available for the initial medwatch, a follow-up medwatch will be filed as appropriate.
|