|
Section: h3, h6: the device was not returned for evaluation but the pictures were reviewed, and they confirm that the insert is broken.The contribution of the device to the reported event could not be corroborated.The clinical/medical investigation concluded that, per complaint details, approximately 11 years post tka, the patient underwent a revision procedure during which it was discovered that the ¿post of original implant had broke¿.The requested clinical documentation had not been provided as of the date of this medical investigation.The provided photos of an explanted insert shows a broken post; however, does not provide insight into the reported event.Without the requested clinical documentation, the root cause of the reported fractured poly insert-post could not be fully assessed or concluded.The patient impact beyond the reported revision/finding of the fractured post could not be determined.No further medical investigation could be rendered at this time.Should clinically relevant documentation/information become available, the clinical/medical task may be re-evaluated.At this time, we have no reason to suspect that the product failed to meet any product specifications at the time of manufacture.Some potential probable causes for this event could include but not limited to traumatic injury or surgical technique.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.D1: brand name, d4: catalog number and udi di: n/a and g5: pma/510 (k): n/a.
|