Catalog Number UNK ATTUNE KNEE TIBIAL TRAY |
Device Problem
Loss of or Failure to Bond (1068)
|
Patient Problems
Adhesion(s) (1695); Hypersensitivity/Allergic reaction (1907); Muscular Rigidity (1968); Pain (1994); Deformity/ Disfigurement (2360); Unspecified Tissue Injury (4559); Swelling/ Edema (4577)
|
Event Date 07/07/2015 |
Event Type
Injury
|
Manufacturer Narrative
|
Product complaint # (b)(4).D4: the device catalog number is unknown; therefore, udi is unavailable.E3 initial reporter occupation: lawyer.H6 component code: appropriate term/code not available (g07002) used to capture no findings available.Investigation summary : no device associated with this report was received for examination.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.Depuy considers the investigation closed.Should additional information be received, the information will be reviewed and the investigation will be re-opened as necessary.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.If information is obtained that was not available for the initial medwatch, a follow-up medwatch will be filed as appropriate.
|
|
Event Description
|
Attune litigation record received.Litigation record alleges defective depuy attune knee system, defective smartset hv bone cement 40g, pain, swelling, joint stiffness, nickel allergy, suffering, impairment, disfigurement, pecuniary loss, economic damages and loosening of the tibial component at an unknown interface and aseptic loosening.Depuy cement were used.Doi: (b)(6) 2015.Dor: (b)(6) 2016.Left knee.
|
|
Manufacturer Narrative
|
Product complaint # (b)(4).Investigation summary no device associated with this report was received for examination.The product investigation found no evidence suspecting an error in the manufacturing or material that would be a contributing factor in the reported allegation(s).A records evaluation (mre) was not perform as part of our company quality system process, all devices are manufactured, inspected, and distributed to approved specifications.Additional complaint information monitoring for potential safety signals will be conducted through complaint trending as part of the post-market surveillance.If additional information is made available, the investigation will be updated as applicable.Device history lot the product investigation found no evidence suspecting an error in the manufacturing or material that would be a contributing factor in the reported allegation(s).A manufacturing records evaluation (mre) was not performed.
|
|
Event Description
|
This mdr report is related to mdr report numbers 3011632150-2022-00046 and 3011632150-2022-00047.The patient was treated as part of the mimics 3d usa post-market observational study on (b)(6) 2021.The subject was implanted with three biomimics 3d stents (a 7.0 x 150mm (this report), and two 7.0 x 125 mm stents) to treat a denovo lesion of the sfa ostial to sfa distal third artery in the left leg.A contralateral approach was used and the lesion was prepared using pre-dilation with percutaneous transluminal angioplasty (pta) and atherectomy.The treated segment was post-dilated with percutaneous transluminal angioplasty (pta).On (b)(6) 2022, an event of occlusion was reported.It was reported as "not related" to the device or procedure but was due to a worsening pre-existing condition.It was also reported as target lesion related.The patient outcome was reported as resolved/recovered.The first intervention was a laser atherectomy and attempted atherectomy/crossing of the lesion in the sfa proximal third to proximal popliteal segment that took place on 24-jan-22.A subsequent intervention on 24-feb-22 involved an additional bm3d stent placement, pta/standard balloon angioplasty and laser atherectomy on the sfa proximal third to proximal popliteal segment with 40-50% residual stenosis.The patient underwent duplex ultrasound (dus) on 25-mar-22 which showed a partial stent occlusion.The patient had also developed left leg claudication.On 29-jul-22, atherectomy and angioplasty of the left sfa proximal third to proximal popliteal was conducted but a successful revascularisation was not achieved.A referral for a femoropopliteal bypass was made.On 14-aug-23, a peripheral angiogram was performed at a hospital by another physician.On 19-sep-23, a left femoral endarterectomy and profundaplasty were conducted.The devices remain implanted.Veryan received additional information in relation to this event on 19-jan-24.
|
|
Manufacturer Narrative
|
Product complaint (b)(4).This report is being submitted pursuant to the provisions of 21 cfr, part 803.This report may be based on information which has not been investigated or verified prior to the required reporting date.This report does not reflect a conclusion by depuy synthes joint reconstruction, or its employees that the report constitutes an admission that the product, depuy synthes joint reconstruction, or its employees caused or contributed to the potential event described in this report.If information is obtained that was not available for the initial report, a follow-up report will be filed as appropriate.Pe code was updated from implant loosening: interface - unknown to implant loosening: interface - cement to implant.
|
|
Search Alerts/Recalls
|
|