Model Number N/A |
Device Problem
Adverse Event Without Identified Device or Use Problem (2993)
|
Patient Problems
Hypersensitivity/Allergic reaction (1907); Unspecified Infection (1930); Pain (1994); Tissue Damage (2104); Complaint, Ill-Defined (2331); Toxicity (2333); Fluid Discharge (2686)
|
Event Date 03/22/2010 |
Event Type
Injury
|
Event Description
|
Patient's legal counsel reported that patient underwent total hip arthroplasty on (b)(6) 2005.Subsequently, legal counsel for patient reports patient was revised (b)(6) 2012 due to patient allegations of elevated cocr levels and tissue/bone destruction.No further information has been provided to date.This report is based on allegations set forth in plaintiff¿s complaint and the allegations contained therein are unverified.Additional information received in the patient's revision operative report noted the date of the revision to be (b)(6) 2010.The reason for the revision was leg length discrepancy, pain, pseudotumor, and metal hypersensitivity.Operative report further noted creamy gray fluid with a pasty consistency.The acetabular liner, modular head and femoral stem were removed and replaced with a biomet acetabular liner and competitor femoral components.Additionally, patient medical records indicate that a revision procedure was performed on an unknown date due to pseudotumor and infection.All components were removed and replaced with competitor cement spacers.
|
|
Manufacturer Narrative
|
Current information is insufficient to permit a conclusion as to the cause of the event.Review of device history records show that lot released with no recorded anomaly or deviation.There are warnings in the package insert that state that this type of event can occur: "undesirable shortening of limb." this report is based on allegations set forth in plaintiff¿s complaint, and the allegations contained therein are unverified.This report is number 3 of 3 mdrs filed for the same event (reference 1825034-2012-01781 / 01782 / 1825034-2015-01986).
|
|
Event Description
|
Patient's legal counsel reported that patient underwent total hip arthroplasty on (b)(6) 2005.Subsequently, legal counsel for patient reports patient was revised (b)(6) 2012 due to patient allegations of elevated cocr levels and tissue/bone destruction.This report is based on allegations set forth in plaintiff¿s complaint and the allegations contained therein are unverified.Additional information received in the patient's revision operative report noted the date of the revision to be (b)(6) 2010.The reason for the revision was leg length discrepancy, pain, pseudotumor, and metal hypersensitivity.Operative report further noted creamy gray fluid with a pasty consistency.The modular head and femoral stem were removed and replaced with a competitor stem and biomet ceramic head.A biomet acetabular liner was also cemented into the well-fixed cup during the revision procedure.Additionally, patient medical records indicate that a revision procedure was performed on an unknown date due to pseudotumor and infection.All components were removed and replaced with competitor cement spacers.
|
|
Manufacturer Narrative
|
The follow-up report is being filed to relay additional information that was unknown at the time of the initial medwatch.
|
|
Search Alerts/Recalls
|