• Decrease font size
  • Return font size to normal
  • Increase font size
U.S. Department of Health and Human Services

MAUDE Adverse Event Report: MEDTRONIC NAVIGATION, INC (LITTLETON) O-ARM IMAGING SYSTEM; IMAGE-INTENSIFIED FLUOROSCOPIC X-RAY SYSTEM, M

  • Print
  • Share
  • E-mail
-
Super Search Devices@FDA
510(k) | DeNovo | Registration & Listing | Adverse Events | Recalls | PMA | HDE | Classification | Standards
CFR Title 21 | Radiation-Emitting Products | X-Ray Assembler | Medsun Reports | CLIA | TPLC
 

MEDTRONIC NAVIGATION, INC (LITTLETON) O-ARM IMAGING SYSTEM; IMAGE-INTENSIFIED FLUOROSCOPIC X-RAY SYSTEM, M Back to Search Results
Model Number UNK_OARM_SYS
Device Problem Adverse Event Without Identified Device or Use Problem (2993)
Patient Problems Unspecified Infection (1930); Unspecified Nervous System Problem (4426)
Event Date 06/08/2020
Event Type  malfunction  
Event Description
(b)(6).B.C.Use of 3d navigation versus traditional fluoroscopy for posterior pelvic ring fixation.Orthopedics.2021.44 (4) 229-234.Doi: (b)(4).Abstract: unstable pelvic ring disruption is most commonly treated with closed reduction and percutaneous screw fixation.Traditional methods involve screw placement under fluoroscopic imaging, but with recent technologic advances, intraoperative 3d navigation can now be used to help with the insertion of sacroiliac screws.Various cadaver studies have shown that placement of sacroiliac screws under 3d navigationis more accurate than placement under traditional fluoroscopic guidance.This retrospective review of 134 patients evaluated the clinical use of 3d navigation vs traditional fluoroscopy for sacroiliac screw insertion at an urban level i trauma center.Analysis of surgical data showed a significantly longer imaging time with the conventional method compared with the more experimental 3d navigation (204.06 seconds vs 66.90 seconds, p<(> <<)>.01).Further, a significantly larger radiation dose to both the patient and the staff was seen with traditional fluoroscopy (80.1 mgy for each) compared with that of 3d navigation (39.0 mgy and 25.1 mgy, respectively).No statistically significant difference was seen for outcome or follow-up variables between the 2 extrapolated groups.These variables included length of hospital stay, infection, nerve injury, and hardware breakage.The authors advocate that 3d navi gated sacroiliac screws are safe and effective for pelvic ring stabilization; this method may be especially applicable in certain difficult imaging situations, such as morbid obesity, bowel gas interference, and overlapping pelvic structures that make the sacral c orridor difficult to discern with traditional 2d fluoroscopy.Safe placement of transiliac-transsacral screws (p<(><<)>.01).Reported events: 1 patient with a superficial infection 1 patient with a deep infection 2 patients with foot drops 1 patient that experienced screw breakage see attached literature article.
 
Manufacturer Narrative
Patient age is the mean value of patients in the study.Patient gender is the majority value of patient in the study.Patient weight not available from the site.Event date is the online accepted date of the literature article.Device lot number, or serial number, unavailable.510(k) is dependent upon the device model number and therefore, unavailable.No parts have been received by the manufacturer for evaluation.Device manufacturing date is dependent on lot number/serial number, therefore, unavailable.Medtronic is submitting this report to comply with fda reporting regulations under 21 cfr parts 4 and 803.This report is based upon information obtained by medtronic, which the company may not have been able to fully investigate or verify prior to the date the report was required by the fda.Medtronic has made reasonable efforts to obtain more complete information and has provided as much relevant information as is available to the company as of the submission date of this report.This report does not constitute an admission or a conclusion by fda, medtronic, or its employees that the device, medtronic, or its employee caused or contributed to the event described in the report.In particular, this report does not constitute an admission by anyone that the product described in this report has any ¿defects¿ or has ¿malfunctioned¿.These words are included in the fda 3500a form and are fixed items for selection created by the fda to categorize the type of event solely for the purpose of regulatory reporting.Medtronic objects to the use of these words and others like them because of the lack of definition and the connotations implied by these terms.This statement should be included with any information or report disclosed to the public under the freedom of information act.Any required fields that are unpopulated are blank because the information is currently unknown or unavailable.A good faith effort will be made to obtain the applicable information relevant to the report.If information is provided in the future, a supplemental report will be issued.
 
Search Alerts/Recalls

  New Search  |  Submit an Adverse Event Report

Brand Name
O-ARM IMAGING SYSTEM
Type of Device
IMAGE-INTENSIFIED FLUOROSCOPIC X-RAY SYSTEM, M
Manufacturer (Section D)
MEDTRONIC NAVIGATION, INC (LITTLETON)
300 foster st
littleton MA 01460
Manufacturer (Section G)
MEDTRONIC NAVIGATION, INC (LITTLETON)
300 foster st
littleton MA 01460
Manufacturer Contact
glen belmer
7000 central avenue ne rcw215
minneapolis, MN 55432
6122713209
MDR Report Key16295986
MDR Text Key309470449
Report Number3004785967-2023-00072
Device Sequence Number1
Product Code OXO
Combination Product (y/n)N
Reporter Country CodeUS
Number of Events Reported1
Summary Report (Y/N)N
Report Source Manufacturer
Source Type Literature,Health Professional
Reporter Occupation Physician
Type of Report Initial
Report Date 02/03/2023
1 Device was Involved in the Event
1 Patient was Involved in the Event
Is this an Adverse Event Report? No
Is this a Product Problem Report? Yes
Device Operator Health Professional
Device Model NumberUNK_OARM_SYS
Device Catalogue NumberUNK_OARM_SYS
Was Device Available for Evaluation? No
Is the Reporter a Health Professional? Yes
Initial Date Manufacturer Received 01/30/2023
Initial Date FDA Received02/03/2023
Was Device Evaluated by Manufacturer? No
Is the Device Single Use? No
Is This a Reprocessed and Reused Single-Use Device? No
Type of Device Usage Reuse
Patient Sequence Number1
Patient Age37 YR
Patient SexMale
-
-