Catalog Number 140720101 |
Device Problem
Osseointegration Problem (3003)
|
Patient Problems
Unspecified Infection (1930); Inadequate Osseointegration (2646)
|
Event Date 03/15/2024 |
Event Type
Injury
|
Manufacturer Narrative
|
Product complaint # (b)(4).This report is being submitted pursuant to the provisions of 21 cfr, part 803 (and/or part 4, as applicable).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, or its employees that the report constitutes an admission that the product, 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 report, a follow-up report will be filed as appropriate.
|
|
Event Description
|
Revision shoulder delta motion post humeral fracture due to infection infection and loosening at the stem humeral.There was no surgical delay.
|
|
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.H10 additional narrative: added: b5 and d10 if information is obtained that was not available for the initial report, a follow-up report will be filed as appropriate.
|
|
Event Description
|
Additional information received: a.What is the event date? (b)(6) 2024 b.What is the explant date (mm/dd/yyyy)? (b)(6) 2024 c.Can you provide the scheduled date of revision surgery? (b)(6) 2024 d.It was indicated that there was loosening.On what interface did the loosening occur? stem humeral e.Please confirm the manufacturer of the cement product.Is it depuy manufactured? if yes, please provide the product code and lot number of the cement product.Stryker simplex f.Can you provide the quantity used for the cement product? 1 g.Was there any surgical delay related to the event? if yes, what is the duration of the delay? no h.Is the biostop g, träger an instrument utilized to insert a cement restrictor, a cement restrictor trial, or the definitive cement restrictor? definitively implant.I.Is size 8 correct? can you describe what was meant by, "left behind in previous surgery"? 8 j.Was the previous surgery the primary implantation or a revision procedure? primary post fracture.K.Why was the device left behind? the surgeon unscrewed the introducer tip disengaging tip instead of pulling it out.¿ was it supposed to be taken out? ¿ was it still inside the patient? ¿ if inside, will there be a procedure for removal? ¿ what was the surgeon¿s opinion- is it safe to leave inside / any chance of migration? "the tip remains in the patient, we tried to remove it but couldn't.To retrieve it we would have meant we had to open the bone involving a bigger operation.The surgeon isn't concerned that it's remained in the bone and shouldn't move.The original surgeon unscrewed the tip as most surgeons are used to unscrewing cement restrictors from the introducer.Biostop has an introducing tip and the implants slide over the tip.He pushes the implant down and then pulls back on the introducer leaving the implant behind.".
|
|
Search Alerts/Recalls
|
|