|
H6, the device, used in treatment, was not returned for evaluation and the reported event could not be confirmed.The clinical/medical investigation concluded that, this case reports that a patient underwent revision 1.5 years post implantation, due to aseptic loosening.Per email communication, the requested surgical reports and x-rays will not be provided, and the hospital does not approve of returning the explanted device for evaluation.The patient impact beyond the revision procedure cannot be determined.Therefore, no further clinical assessment is warranted at this time.Should clinically relevant documentation be provided, this clinical/medical task may be re-evaluated.A review of the manufacturing records did not reveal a manufacturing abnormality that could have caused or contributed to the reported incident.A review of complaint history did not reveal additional complaints for the listed batch.A review of the risk management file and instructions for use documents revealed this failure mode was previously identified.At this time, we have no reason to suspect that the product failed to meet any product specifications at the time of manufacture.Factors and/or some potential probable causes that could contribute to the reported event have been identified as but not limited to abnormal motion over time, bone degeneration, fit/sizing, lack of ingrowth, lifetime of device, and traumatic injury.Based on this investigation, the need for corrective action is not indicated.Without the return of the actual product involved, our investigation could not proceed.Should the device or additional information be received, the complaint will be reopened.No further investigation is warranted for this complaint; however, we will continue to monitor for future complaints and investigate as necessary.We consider this investigation closed.
|