|
It was reported by the patient's relative that the 14 year old patient had ankle surgery (b)(6) 2020 using an arthrex internal ankle brace during the brostrum procedure.Patient is experiencing significant swelling, rash, etc.Post surgery.Reporter is seeking material composition of the device to assist in determining if patient is having a possible allergic reaction to the arthrex device.Additional information obtained 4/28/2020: it is reported that the patient has had a rough recovery and an mri showed that the internal brace was not placed correctly.Patient will require a second surgery which has been scheduled for (b)(6) 2020 with a different surgeon, at a different facility, to address the internal brace and possible ligament issues due to the placement of the (b)(6) 2020 device.The surgeon plans to open the whole ankle, address the ligament issues (which they are unsure if related to the placement of the brace or another issue the patient may have) and surgeon will also correct the misplacement of the internal brace, with plans to remove the original device placed in (b)(6) 2020.Reporter does not know what manufacturer product the surgeon plans to use during the second procedure.Reporter mentioned it is possible that the issues her daughter had been experiencing since the (b)(6) 2020 procedure may have been related to the misplacement of the device which may have caused the swelling and that it could possibly not be related to an allergy as originally thought.Additional information obtained 5/4/2020: it has been confirmed that the revision procedure took place on (b)(6) 2020 as scheduled.The sales rep who was present spoke with the revision surgeon regarding the case.It was concluded by the surgeon that the original procedure surgeon had incorrectly placed the anchors and that was why the patient was having adverse effects.During the revision the anchors were not explanted.The revising surgeon drilled through the one in the talus, that was incorrectly placed on the lateral process of the talus, in order to remove the previous fibertape.The only part of the original device removed was the fibertape.The surgery was completed using an ar-1788j-cp with the anchors now correctly placed the specific internal brace part number was unable to be obtained.Using the sales for the original surgery facility it was determined that the most likely part number implanted on (b)(6) 2020 was ar-1688-cp.
|