| Model Number |
1012-14-050 |
| Medical Device Problem Code |
Adverse Event Without Identified Device or Use Problem (2993)
|
| Health Effect - Clinical Code |
Pain (1994)
|
| Date of Event |
08/24/2021
|
|
Type of Reportable Event
|
Serious Injury
|
|
Additional Manufacturer Narrative
|
|
Product complaint # (b)(4).If information is obtained that was not available for the initial medwatch, a follow-up medwatch will be filed as appropriate.
|
| |
|
Event or Problem Description
|
|
On tuesday, (b)(6), at (b)(6) hospital, dr.(b)(6) revised the left hip of a patient who had a left primary hip arthroplasty implanted by dr.(b)(6) at (b)(6) hospital in 2016.Patient presented in dr.(b)(6) clinic with left anterior thigh pain.Dr.(b)(6) elected to remove the sz 5 trilock bps that was in the patient to treat for the pain.Dr.(b)(6) removed the 32 +9 biolox delta femoral head with a tamp.Dr.(b)(6) then began removing the stem using a combination of rigid and flexible osteotomes as well as the depuy screw in femoral stem inserter and associated slap hammer.While trying to remove the well fixed femoral stem dr.(b)(6) fractured the proximal femur.As a result, dr.(b)(6) chose to treat the patient with a competitor's revision stem.Dr.(b)(6) removed the primary liner and replace it with a sz 56x 36 +4 10 deg altrx liner to help improve biomechanics.There was no indication by anyone that the products did not perform as expected.No instrumentation broke during the case.There was no loosening of any components.Doi: 2016.Dor: (b)(6) 2021, left hip.
|
| |
|
Additional Manufacturer Narrative
|
|
Product complaint # (b)(4).Investigation summary : no device associated with this report was received for examination.The information received will be retained for potential series investigations if triggered by trend analysis, post market surveillance, or other events within the quality system.Depuy considers the investigation closed.Should additional information be received, the information will be reviewed, and the investigation will be re-opened as necessary.Device history lot : for allegations of pain a device manufacturing (mre) review will not be performed even when product/lot information is known.Per (b)(4) , review of the device history record is unlikely to add value to the complaint investigation regarding an allegation of pain.
|
| |
|
Search Alerts/Recalls
|