| Model Number |
SO893P |
| Medical Device Problem Codes |
Crack (1135); Fracture (1260)
|
| Health Effect - Clinical Codes |
Insufficient Information (4580); No Clinical Signs, Symptoms or Conditions (4582)
|
| Date of Event |
08/31/2021
|
|
Type of Reportable Event
|
Serious Injury
|
|
Additional Manufacturer Narrative
|
|
Manufacturing site evaluation: investigation on-going.Additional information / investigation results will be provided in a supplemental report.
|
| |
|
Event or Problem Description
|
|
It was reported that there was an issue with so878p: arcadius xp l implant 14° 25x35x18mm.According to the complaint description, the implant cracked.After fully seating the implant, two screws were successfully implanted in the top holes.A third was inserted in the bottom left (looking down at the patient) hole.The implant cracked on the front face upon final tightening of this screw, so the doctor opted to remove and replace the spacer.No additional intervention was required to retrieve the device beyond normal retrieval procedure, as the device stayed in one piece.There was a significant surgery delay.Additional information was not provided.Additional patient information is not available.The malfunction is filed under aag reference (b)(4).
|
| |
|
Additional Manufacturer Narrative
|
|
Correction: b5 - patient harm confirmed.Upon review of the investigation and confirmed patient harm, the product risk analysis (pra) was adjusted.The complaint is no longer considered to be reportable; severity is now decreased to 2(5).Investigation was previously submitted.
|
| |
|
Event or Problem Description
|
|
Update: the patient harm was confirmed to be "surgical delay" and no other patient impact.
|
| |
|
Event or Problem Description
|
|
Update: product updated to so893p - arcadius xp l implant 14° 29x40x18mm.The product was removed/retrieved; there was an additional medical intervention.This adverse event is filed under aag reference (b)(4).
|
| |
|
Additional Manufacturer Narrative
|
|
Corrected information - b1, b2, d4, (material, lot #, exp.Date, udi), h1.Investigation results: we made a microscopic investigation of the thread and the crack.Here we found, that the thread is damaged.Some of the plastic (peek) was squeezed off and pushed through the thread.Through the damaged thread and the squeezed material it came to inner tensions.Those tensions lead to a crack.Device history review: the device quality and manufacturing history records (dhr) have been checked for all leading device(s) lot numbers and the products found to be according to our specification valid at the time of production.There are currently no further complaints with this lot and error pattern at hand.The current failure rate is within the risk analysis and therefore acceptable; severity was 3(5) and probability 3(5).Conclusion and preventive measures: the damaged thread and the crushed material caused internal tension.These stresses led to the crack.We cannot determine the cause of the damage to the thread.Based upon the investigation results, a capa is not necessary.
|
| |
|
Search Alerts/Recalls
|