Batch review performed on 16 february 2016: (b)(4).On 19 feb 2016 the medical affairs director made the following analysis: according to report, the surgeon asked for a dimensional verification of the stem dimensions, because he surmised that the difficulties he had to drive the stem down were due to a dimensional problem.This is a technical aspect, which will be investigated technically on the returned device.Clinically speaking, several situations could lead to the described contingency without requiring a real dimensional mismatch, such as insufficient penetration of the broach (according to report, trial reduction with broach and trial head was not performed), inaccurate rotational positioning of the final stem versus broached cavity, varus or valgus positioning of the stem.Of course none of these possible situations can be verified.For this reason, the clinical investigation cannot be expected to draw any conclusion.
|
On 23 march 2016 the (b)(4) project manager analysed the returned implants.Observing the femoral stem some scratches can be noted, also on the neck: such signs was probably caused during the removal phase.The ha on the surface of the stem is almost totally present.On the femoral head some signs can be seen probably caused during the removal phase.The stem will be dimensionally analyzed by the cq department.With the information we have till now, it is not possible to determine the root cause of the event.
|