|
SMITH & NEPHEW, INC. JUNI COCR FB FEM SZ 2 LM RL; PROSTHESIS, KNEE, FEMOROTIBIAL, NON-CONSTRAINED, CEMENTED, METAL/POLYMER
|
Back to Search Results |
|
| Model Number |
71422362 |
| Medical Device Problem Code |
Adverse Event Without Identified Device or Use Problem (2993)
|
| Health Effect - Clinical Code |
Pain (1994)
|
| Date of Event |
09/29/2020
|
|
Type of Reportable Event
|
Serious Injury
|
|
Event or Problem Description
|
|
It was reported that, on (b)(6) 2020 the patient had 11 degrees of varus knee alignment which was corrected to neutral during ukr of medial compartment on (b)(6) 2020.On (b)(6) 2020 presented pain in the lateral knee compartment.Therefore, on (b)(6) 2020 the patient had a uka of the lateral compartment.There is no information that confirms that the devices have been explanted.The pre-op and 3 months post-op radiographic evaluation could possibly explain the overloading of lateral compartment and subsequent need for additional ukr on the lateral side.
|
| |
|
Additional Manufacturer Narrative
|
|
Internal complaint reference number: (b)(4).
|
| |
|
Event or Problem Description
|
|
It was reported that, on (b)(6) 2020 the patient had 11 degrees of varus knee alignment which was corrected to neutral during ukr of medial compartment on (b)(6) 2020.On (b)(6) 2020, patient presented pain in the lateral knee compartment.Therefore, on (b)(6) 2020 the patient had a uka of the lateral compartment.The pre-operative and 3 months post-operative radiographic evaluation could possibly explain the overloading of lateral compartment and subsequent need for additional ukr on the lateral side.On (b)(6) 2021, the patient following implantation of an additional uni knee prosthesis into the same knee, experienced loosening of the initial (medial) uni knee tibial component.Therefore, on (b)(6) 2021 the patient had another revision surgery where both uni knees were explanted and a tka was implanted.The explants are not available for analysis, nor operative reports and x-rays yet.
|
| |
|
Additional Manufacturer Narrative
|
|
The device, used in treatment, was not returned for evaluation and the reported event could not be confirmed.The clinical/medical investigation concluded that, a review of the documents provided did not provide any insight into the root cause of the reported events.The requested x-ray/ mri images were not provided for review.Per the provided adverse event form the patient is "recovering" following the revision.Based on the limited information provided a thorough medical assessment could not be performed.Should additional information be provided, the clinical/medical investigation task will be re-opened for further evaluation.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 complaint history for the listed part revealed no prior complaints for the listed failure mode with the same batch number.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 abnormal motion over time, bone degeneration, fit/sizing issue, lack of ingrowth, lifetime of device, and/or 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.
|
| |
|
Search Alerts/Recalls
|
|
|