|
The reported event could be confirmed, since the device was returned for evaluation and matches the alleged failure mode.The device inspection revealed the following: the received nail is completely broken from one of the proximal holes.Significant drill marks were found at the lateral entrance of the hole; they progress through the bore towards medial.The drill marks were generated by a deviated drill which most likely had created the starting point of the fracture (notching effect) somewhere at the lateral edge.The fracture pattern resembles a fatigue fracture, evident by appearance of lines of rest/ waves and partial shiny surface.Also, one of the edges of the distal round hole shows signs of intra-operative misdrilling.A review of the device history for the reported lot did not indicate any abnormalities.No corrective actions are required at this time.No indications of material, manufacturing or design related problems were found during the investigation.A review of the labeling did not indicate any abnormalities.A formal medical opinion was sought from an independent medical professional for the provided x-rays.Strictly based on the available information he opined that the breakage is most likely due to a non-union.The fracture has an atypical location and morphology and is pretty likely associated to bisphosphonate intake.Also, it would have been advisable to select dynamic locking for the given fracture type to achieve necessary compression.Overall, there is a strong patient related factor with the location and highly unstable fracture pattern along with a user related attribution to the failure by not going with a dynamic locking, thus preventing compression at the fracture site.Based on the above investigation, the root cause of the issue is related to a combination of both user and patient related factors, but predominantly it is patient related.If any further information is provided, the complaint report will be updated.
|