The reported event was confirmed, based on available medical record and health care professionals opinion.The device inspection was not possible as the product was not returned for investigation.A review of the device history for the reported lot did not indicate any abnormalities.No corrective actions are required at this time.No indications of material, manufacturing or design related problems were found during the investigation.A review of the labeling did not indicate any abnormalities.The instructions for use instructs user that: ¿deep wound infection (early or late) which may necessitate removal of the prosthesis.On rare occasions, arthrodesis of the involved joint or amputation of the limb may be required.¿ formal medical opinion was sought from an experienced independent medical expert as below: there is no reason to believe that in the short timeframe between the primary implantation and in this complication, any loosening could be seen as the implant has not yet integrated in the bone at all.Therefore, a ct scan is not helpful for the further assessment, here.However, the surgeon explained the clinical situation in which the patient presented an early infection of the implant (within 6 weeks after implantation) with severe wound healing and closure issues.The patient was transferred to the op for revision with i&d and exchange of the poly insert.There were no results of the specimen taken presented so far, therefore we only have a clinical suspicion of an infection.Based on investigation, the root cause was attributed to a patient related issue.The failure was caused by infection at early stage of surgery.If device is returned or any further information is provided, the investigation report will be reassessed.
|