|
It was reported that a (b)(6) year-old caucasian female patient underwent a breast augmentation revision with a mentor memorygel breast implant 755cc and experienced rupture on the left side post-operatively, which was confirmed via mri.At the time of this report, mentor has received no information regarding explantation or an expected explantation date.
|
|
Since the device has not been returned for analysis, no product failure analysis can be conducted, and no determination of possible contributing factors can be made.As such, the investigation will be closed.If the complaint device is received in the future, the investigation will be reopened and conducted as appropriate.A manufacturing record evaluation (mre) was performed, and no anomalies were found related to this complaint.In addition, the mre verifies that the device was manufactured in accordance with documented specification and procedures.Reason for device explant and/or reoperation: rupture manufacturer¿s reference number: (b)(4).
|
|
On mar 29 2022, additional information was received indicating the date of explantation was (b)(6) 2022.On apr 5 2022, the mentor failure analysis lab received two devices with the same lot for evaluation.Device a evaluation summary: the product was returned to mentor for evaluation.Mentor conducted a visual inspection and leak testing of the returned device.Visual analysis of the returned sample revealed that no damage or anomalies were observed on the smooth mod + prof xtra 755cc breast implant.Leak testing was performed, in accordance with mentor procedures, and no leak sites were detected during the analysis.Although no conclusion could be reached on the cause of the reported event, the instructions for use contain the following caution: rupture status identified by mri evaluation includes both suspected ruptures, which are those ruptures identified by mri but not confirmed by explantation and examination of the device, and confirmed ruptures, which are those ruptures that are confirmed by evaluation of the explanted devices.The event described could not be confirmed as the breast implant was returned without detectable damage.Although no product defect was identified, there may have been other circumstances or issues that occurred during the use of the device that could not be replicated during the laboratory analysis.As part of mentor¿s quality process, all devices are manufactured, inspected, and released to approved specifications.Device b evaluation summary: the product was returned to mentor for evaluation.Mentor conducted a visual inspection and leak testing of the returned device.Visual analysis of the returned sample revealed that no damage or anomalies were observed on the smooth mod + prof xtra 755cc breast implant.Leak testing was performed, in accordance with mentor procedures, and no leak sites were detected during the analysis.Although no conclusion could be reached on the cause of the reported event, the instructions for use contain the following caution: rupture status identified by mri evaluation includes both suspected ruptures, which are those ruptures identified by mri but not confirmed by explantation and examination of the device, and confirmed ruptures, which are those ruptures that are confirmed by evaluation of the explanted devices.The event described could not be confirmed as the breast implant was returned without detectable damage.Although no product defect was identified, there may have been other circumstances or issues that occurred during the use of the device that could not be replicated during the laboratory analysis.As part of mentor¿s quality process, all devices are manufactured, inspected, and released to approved specifications.Manufacturer¿s reference number: (b)(4).
|