Model Number NK1007T |
Device Problem
Osseointegration Problem (3003)
|
Patient Problem
Hip Fracture (2349)
|
Event Date 04/04/2023 |
Event Type
Injury
|
Event Description
|
It was reported that there was an issue with nk1007t - corehip std cementless 12/14 size 7.According to the complaint description, the artificial femoral head surgery on the 5th of january was completed without any problems.One week after discharge from the hospital, the patient suffered a fall fracture that let to fractures around the stem.The doctor concluded that it was a broken bone in a fall and not an implant problem.A revision surgery was necessary.This case is related to (b)(4).Additional information was not provided nor available.The adverse event is filed under aag reference 100032859 (400597104).Involved components: nk392k - isodur prosthesis head 12/14 26mm xl - lot 52777465; nk301k - bipolar cup id26mm od51mm self-centering - lot 52629695.
|
|
Manufacturer Narrative
|
Manufacturing site evaluation: investigation on-going.Additional information / investigation results will be provided in a supplemental report.
|
|
Event Description
|
This case is related to (b)(4).The adverse event is filed under aag reference (b)(4).Involved components: nk392 - isodur prosthesis head 12/14 26mm xl - lot 52777465.Nk301k - bipolar cup id26mm od51mm self-centering - lot 52629695.
|
|
Manufacturer Narrative
|
Additional information: d9 - no product return.H6 - codes updated.Investigation: no investigation method could be applied, because no product was available for investigation.The provided x-ray shows the fracture of the bone in the distal area of the shaft of the implant.The prosthesis itself is undamaged.Batch history review: the device quality and manufacturing history records (dhr) have been checked for all available lot numbers and the products were found to be according to our specification valid at the time of production.Root cause cannot be finally concluded.Therefore the root cause specific risk cannot be identified.The potential risk determined during initial vigilance evaluation remains valid.Explanation and rationale: at this time we assume that the mentioned bone fracture is not related to our product.It is rather to be assumed that the mentioned fall of the patient led to the bone fracture.Therefore, an evaluation regarding similar incidents with our implants is not indicated.If the product is returned in the future, an investigation will again be performed and updated.Conclusion/preventive measures: based on the investigation results, a capa is not necessary.
|
|
Search Alerts/Recalls
|