The reported event could be confirmed since x-rays were reported and show the backing out of the distal screw.Since x-rays were provided, the opinion of a medical expert was request and is the following: [.] the x-ray show a periprosthetic fracture proximal to a knee arthroplasty.The bone shows, that there has been a plate (or at least there are some screw holes in the ml-plane) adjusted to the distal femur.The op-report says that there was a liss-plate before and that the plate and cerclage construct dislocated seven weeks after the initial operation.It was decided to perform the revision with an antegrade nailing system.[.]" to the question of " is there any particular reason the als screws would have backed out in this case?", the answer of the medical expert was: "[.] the fracture is just proximal to the most proximal of the distal screws and thus very unstable.The ap-screw has been positioned exactly proximal to the femoral shield of the prosthesis.In this case the shield acts as a lever arm to the ap-screw and therefore it is not a surprise, that the screw backed out of the construct.This distal ap locking screw is the only distal fixation in the ap plane.As the epiphysis widens here to the distal femoral condyles, a lack of stability results.The distal fragment which has a long spike in the ap view with the fracture line in the frontal plane can despite of the three mediolateral distal screws pretty easily move like a windshield wiper around the ap-screw.The advanced locking screw which is positioned most proximal mediolaterally has a high intrinsic stability, but, in contrast to the locking screws of a plate is not firmly linked with the implant.It cannot be proven the x-rays only, but it seems as if the moving forces resulting from this instability on the screw were higher then the locking forces and as a result the screw migrated forward (as can be seen in the 14 d.Post op x-ray) [.]" in summary, based on investigation, the complex situation with a highly instable fracture led to the reported event.A review of the device history was not possible because the lot number was not communicated.No corrective actions are required at this time.A review of the labeling did not indicate any abnormalities.No indications of material, manufacturing or design related problems were found during the investigation.If the device is returned or if any additional information is provided, the investigation will be reassessed.
|