(b)(4).Customer has indicated that the product will not be returned to zimmer biomet for investigation.Reported event was unable to be confirmed due to limited information received from the customer.Device history record (dhr) review was unable to be performed as the lot number of the device involved in the event is unknown.Root cause was unable to be determined as the necessary information to adequately investigate the reported event was not provided.There are warnings in the package insert that this type of event can occur and risks are addressed in risk documentation.If any further information is found which would change or alter any conclusions or information, a supplemental will be filed accordingly.Zimmer biomet will continue to monitor for trends.Lewold, stefan."oxford meniscal bearing knee versus the marmor knee in unicompartmental arthroplasty for arthrosis" (1995).The journal of arthroplasty,, volume 10, no.6.
|
Information was received based on review of a journal article entitled, "oxford meniscal bearing knee versus the marmor knee in unicompartmental arthroplasty for arthrosis.A swedish multicenter survival study" lewold, s.Et al.The journal of arthroplasty vol.10 no.6 1995.The patient was revision sixteen (16) months after implantation due to contralateral arthrosis.All components were removed.
|