|
H3, 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, responses to the clinical requests were not provided; however, per complaint details, the patient suffered a fracture superior to the implant; therefore, a poly insert revision was performed so the patient could be ¿washed out as well¿.No other complications were reported.Based on this limited information, the clinical root cause could not be definitively concluded, although the reported ¿fracture superior to the implant¿ was most likely the contributing factor.Reportedly, there was no surgical delay or patient injury/impact as the procedure was completed with a backup device; therefore, no further medical assessment is warranted at this time.Should clinically relevant documentation/information become available, the clinical/medical task may be re-evaluated.A review of complaint history did not reveal additional complaints for the listed device.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 potential causes that could contribute to the reported event could include but not limited to excessive forces applied to implant and surgical technique.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.
|