|
Inspection of the device was not possible as it remains implanted in the patient.A review of device history records could be not performed as the subject lot number was provided.A review of complaint history for this catalogue number identified no adverse trends.The patient was implanted with hardware on (b)(6) 2019.The construct was composed of a three (3) level plate, eight (8) screws, and bone graft.Upon review of the provided radiographic image, the reported fracture was confirmed.The construct spanned from c4 to c7.The fracture appears to have occurred at the superior-most level of the construct (c4).It was communicated that the implanted bone graft (non-stryker product) at c4/c5 had fractured, and 2-3 mm of plate subsidence was observed.The patient has been on testosterone for 5 years and it is possible that the patient had poor bone density.Evidence of fusion cannot be confirmed in the provided image.It is likely that the cause of the observed issue was multifactorial.The fracture of the bone graft and subsidence in the superior level may have created unanticipated loading at c4.Lack of arthrodesis in those levels could have contributed to the observed fracture as well.According to the ozark surgical technique, if healing is delayed or does not occur, the implant could break, bend, or loosen.
|