Catalog Number UNK HIP FEMORAL HEAD |
Device Problems
Device Dislodged or Dislocated (2923); Naturally Worn (2988)
|
Patient Problems
Joint Dislocation (2374); No Code Available (3191)
|
Event Type
Injury
|
Manufacturer Narrative
|
(b)(4).If information is obtained that was not available for the initial medwatch, a follow-up medwatch will be filed as appropriate.(b)(4).
|
|
Event Description
|
A literature article entitled ¿anterior cortical window technique instead of extended trochanteric osteotomy in revision total hip arthroplasty: a minimum 10-year follow-up¿ written by chan ho park, md et al, published in clinics in orthopedic surgery 2019, 11: 396-402; https://doi.Org/10.4055/cios.2019.11.4.396 was reviewed.The purpose of the article was report on the investigations of intraoperative and postoperative complications, radiological and clinical results (such as patient-reported outcome and abductor deficiency), and survivorship of revision tha performed using an anterior cortical window at a minimum follow-up of 10 years.50 patients (56 hips) were followed up for 10-13 years were included in the study.52 hips had cementless stems, and four hips had cemented stems.The article does not mention if the stems were cemented or non-cemented.Depuy product used: aml and s-rom reasons for revision, listed in table one are as follows: cup loosening (previous stems and femoral heads had to be revised as well as the acetabular cup and liner because scratches of the metallic femoral head were found during revision and new femoral heads were not compatible with previous stems), total loosening, stem loosening, liner wear and recurrent dislocation.
|
|
Manufacturer Narrative
|
Depuy synthes is submitting this report pursuant to the provisions of 21 cfr, part 803.This report may be based on information which depuy synthes has not been able to investigate or verify prior to the required reporting date.This report does not reflect a conclusion by fda, depuy synthes or its employees that the report constitutes an admission that the device, depuy synthes, or its employees caused or contributed to the potential event described in this report.Product complaint # (b)(4).Investigation summary : no device associated with this report was received for examination.A worldwide lot specific complaint database search, or device history record (dhr) review was not possible because the required lot code(s) was not provided.Based on previous investigations this complication of joint replacement is unlikely to have been the result of a device failing to meet required specifications.The information received will be retained for potential series investigations if triggered by trend analysis, post market surveillance, or other events within the quality system.Corrective action was not indicated.Device history lot : null.Device history batch : null.Device history review : null.If information is obtained that was not available for the initial medwatch, a follow-up medwatch, a follow-up medwatch will be filed as appropriate.
|
|
Search Alerts/Recalls
|
|