SMITH & NEPHEW, INC. R3 MULTI HOLE ACETABULAR SHELL 54MM; PROSTHESIS, HIP, SEMI-CONSTRAINED, UNCEMENTED, METAL/POLYMER, POROUS
|
Back to Search Results |
|
Catalog Number 71338666 |
Device Problem
Unintended Movement (3026)
|
Patient Problem
Injury (2348)
|
Event Date 11/15/2018 |
Event Type
Injury
|
Event Description
|
It was reported that a revision surgery was performed due to cup loosening confirmed by x rays.During the first stage revision of the left hip, the surgeon extracted a r3 multihole cup, liner and femoral head and reflection screws.The xlpe liner shows damage to posterior wall and the femoral head shows damage.Metallosis could be detected in the soft tissue of the acetabulum.
|
|
Manufacturer Narrative
|
The associated complaint devices were returned and evaluated.The lab analysis concluded, there is evidence to support the root cause for this issue is at least one of the screws was left unseated in its screw hole.The screw head being left above the shell id surface, did not allow for the liner to be seated and locked into place.The loose liner ultimately lead to the need to revise these implants.Also, the impingement of the screw head with the liner most likely produced wear debris which is what was reported seen in the surrounding tissue.The clinical/medical team concluded, the reported metallosis may be consistent with an adverse reaction to metal debris from the reported motion of the shell or impingement from the stem neck and shell.Lab analysis of the explanted devices indicates there was likely impingement of the screw head with the poly liner, as well as the poly liner with the neck of the femoral component, which most likely produced wear debris.This would be consistent with the reported complaint, however without the supporting lab/pathology results, metallosis cannot be confirmed.The loosening of the shell and migration over time cannot be concluded on the single image provided.The failure of this liner seating is likely due to the screw not being seated but whether this was not seated during implant vs migration over time cannot be concluded.The patient impact beyond the revision and associated post-operative healing pain cannot be determined.No further clinical assessment is warranted at this time.A review of the production documentation for the corresponding products did not reveal any deviation from the standard manufacturing processes.A review of complaint history for the listed parts revealed no prior complaints for the listed batches.If new information is received in the future, this complaint can be re-opened.
|
|
Search Alerts/Recalls
|
|
|