This file is a review of the following journal article: selles, c., et al (2020) patient-reported outcomes following arthroscopic triangular fibrocartilage complex repair.Arthroscopic triangular fibrocartilage complex repair, vol.9, pages 58-62 (netherlands).The study emphasizes on the determination of the functional outcome of patients with symptomatic tfcc injuries treated with arthroscopic debridement or repair.The patients evaluated on course of this study: 51 patients.The article describes the following procedure: a retrospective study of all consecutive patients with a tfcc injury treated arthroscopically was conducted.The devices involved were: unk-implant (micro quick anchor) complications described: three patients had pain due to the polydioxanone suture.After removal of the suture knot these complaints disappeared.No other complications were found.In nine patients additional surgery was performed.An ulna shortening osteotomy was performed in three patients.These were all patients with palmer 2c lesions in which debridement of the central tfcc perforation provided insufficient pain relief.Two patients had an additional arthroscopy, one for an additional debridement of the same tfcc lesion, and another for a new 1b tfcc lesion.Due to persistent pain caused by midcarpal and radiocarpal osteoarthritis a wrist denervation was performed in two patients.One patient with a 1b lesion had an open repair 6 months after arthroscopic ligament to capsule suturing of the lesion.One patient had a proximal row carpectomy followed by a radioscapholunate arthrodesis due to complaints caused by osteoarthritis in the 1 year following initial arthroscopy.
|
This report is being submitted in pursuant to the provisions of 21 cfr, part 803.This report may be based on information which has not been able to investigate or verify prior to the required reporting date.This report does not reflect a conclusion by mitek or its employees that the report constitutes an admission that the device, mitek, or its employees caused or contributed to the potential event described in this report.If information is obtained that was not available for the initial medwatch, a follow-up medwatch will be filed as appropriate.Investigation summary = the complaint device is not being returned, therefore unavailable for a physical evaluation.This complaint file was opened to document complaints derived through a journal article review.The journal article review indicated depuy mitek product failure(s).Multiple attempts were done to obtain more information from the author, however, no response was received.It is unknown if complaints derived from this journal article were previously reported and documented in the depuy mitek complaint system at the time of occurrence as no product code/lot number information was provided to perform the search.With the information provided, and without the complaint device to evaluate, we cannot determine a root cause for the reported problem.Since no lot number was provided, a manufacturing record evaluation or sterile load review could not be conducted.If any additional information is obtained, this complaint will be re-opened to capture that information.At this point in time, no corrective action is required, and no further action is warranted.However, depuy synthes mitek will continue to track any related complaints within this device family as a means of monitoring the extent with which this complaint is observed in the field.
|