|
It was reported that, after a bilateral tka surgery had been performed on 2008, the patient experienced instability in the left knee.A post of the gii ps hi flex isrt sz 5-6 13 was noticed to be broken.This adverse event was solved by a revision surgery to explant the poly and replace with another poly on (b)(6) 2021.The current health status of the patient is unknown.
|
|
The associated device was returned and evaluated.A visual inspection of the returned device confirmed the stated failure mode.The device was severely worn and damaged.The post was also fractured from the device.The fractured component was returned with the device.The device was also discolored along the surface likely from extended exposure to bodily fluids.A review of complaint history revealed similar events for the listed device, but no similar events for the batch, this failure mode will be monitored for future complaints for any necessary corrective actions.The clinical/medical evaluation concluded that this case reports, the patient experienced left knee instability, insert post breakage, and revision, approximately thirteen years after a bilateral tka was performed.Reportedly, no accident or injury occurred.The product/visual evaluation confirmed the failure mode.The patient¿s current health status is unknown and no additional requested information was provided.Based on the information provided, the clinical root cause of the reported insert post breakage cannot be definitively concluded.The patient impact beyond the reported knee instability, device breakage and revision cannot be determined, and no further clinical medical assessment can be rendered.A review of the manufacturing records did not reveal a manufacturing abnormality that could have caused or contributed to the reported incident.At this time, we do not have reason to suspect that the product failed to meet any product specifications at the time of manufacture.A review of the risk management file and instructions for use document revealed this failure mode was previously identified.The anticipated risk level is still adequate.Assessment of historical escalated cases concluded that there are no prior actions related to this device and failure mode.A contribution of the device to the reported event could be corroborated as the device shows signs of damage/wear.Possible causes could include but not limited to traumatic injury, patient anatomy or abnormal loading of limb.Based on this investigation, the need for corrective action is not indicated.Should additional information be received, the complaint will be reopened.No further investigation is warranted for this complaint; however, we will continue to monitor future complaints and investigate as necessary.We consider this investigation closed.
|