Correction: b5, h6 (health effect - impact code) additional data: h6, h10.Additional device evaluation details: the returned rod was visually inspected and typical scoring was observed on the distraction rod, which is consistent with incremental distraction.Residual bodily fluids were seen between the distraction rod and the housing tube.In-house device x-rays were taken, which showed a broken magnet assembly and a dislocated inner raceway of the bearing.Functional testing was performed, and the rod was unable to be distracted, confirming the reported rod jam.The rod was then sectioned to inspect the internal components and the ball bearing was found to be fractured.Additionally, based on corrosion observed on the components, it was determined bodily fluid ingress into the housing tube likely occurred.Further sectioning confirmed a torn o-ring, possibly a result of patient activity/weight-bearing, which may have allowed the fluid ingress.A definitive root cause is unable to be determined but based on rod evaluation findings, it is possible bodily fluid ingress into the housing led to the material degradation and subsequent fracture of the bearing, which resulted in the rod jamming and possibly the magnet fracture.It should also be noted the device was implanted for approximately 33 months; per the ifu, the device should be removed after an implantation time of no more than two years.Therefore, implantation duration may have been a contributing factor.Should any additional, relevant information become available, a supplemental report will be submitted.
|