|
It was reported that, after thr surgery had been performed on (b)(6) 2015, the patient experienced a peri prosthetic fracture, therefore, the patient needed a revision stem (which was a stryker stem) and a head/ poly exchange.This adverse event was solved by revision surgery on (b)(6) 2021.Current health status of patient.
|
|
Section: h3, h6: it was reported that, after a total hip replacement surgery had been performed on (b)(6) 2015, the patient experienced a peri prosthetic fracture, therefore, the patient needed a revision stem and a head / liner exchange.This adverse event was solved by revision surgery on (b)(6) 2021.The device, used in treatment was not returned for evaluation, therefore further analysis was not possible.Therefore, the relationship between the reported event and the device cannot be confirmed.However, based on the communicated information, the product history could be reviewed.The production documentation was reviewed.There are no indications that the part failed to match specification at the time of manufacturing.There were no further complaints reported for the batch in scope.The failure mode and the severity are covered through the corresponding risk management files.The ifu lit.No.12.23, ed.03/21 lists hip fracture as potential adverse device effect.A thorough medical assessment is not possible, since no relevant information was received.The root cause stays undetermined after investigation.Based on the limited information it is not possible to speculate about factors which could have contributed to the reported issue.To date, further actions are not deemed necessary.Should additional information become available, this complaint will be reassessed.Smith and nephew will monitor this device for further similar issues.
|