|
It was reported that a revision surgery was performed because the patient had dislocated several times with mostly closed reductions doing the trick.An open reduction was also attempted as a last resort.On opening the wound, it was very clear that the acetabular component was properly loose causing much discomfort for the patient.All available information has been disclosed.If additional information should become available, a supplemental report will be submitted accordingly.
|
|
H6: the associated device, used in treatment, was not returned for evaluation and the reported event could not be confirmed.The clinical / medical investigation concluded that, per complaint details, a patient underwent a hip revision secondary to multiple dislocations and closed reductions.Reportedly, the open reduction was performed as a last resort and ¿it was very clear that the acetabular component was properly loose causing much of discomfort for the patient¿.The acetabular shell and liner were revised along with an unknown component ¿to cover the reflection¿.Responses to the information requests had not been received as of the date of this medical investigation; therefore, the root cause of the reported dislocations and the intra-op finding of the loose acetabular component could not be fully assessed or concluded.The patient impact beyond the reported dislocations, closed reductions, intra-op finding (loosened acetabular component) and the revision procedure could not be determined.Should additional clinically relevant information/documentation become available, then the clinical/medical task may be re-opened for further evaluation.A review of complaint history did not reveal additional complaints for the listed batch.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 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.Some potential causes could include but are not limited to limited range of motion, surgical technique or patient anatomy.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.
|