|
Reported event: an event regarding crack/fracture involving an exeter stem was reported.The event was confirmed via evaluation of the returned device.Method & results: -product evaluation and results: visual inspection: visual inspection was performed as part of the material analysis which indicated the following: exeter v40 stem with fracture location.On visual examination, the fracture was observed through the neck of the stem with the femoral head remaining locked on the stem trunnion.Surface material damage is observed on the mid-stem region of the medial and lateral sides of the stem, respectively.These indications were likely a result of third-body damage and micromotion effects due to cement mantle breakdown.Material analysis: a material analysis was performed and indicated the following: "stereo microscope imaging was performed on both the proximal and distal fracture surfaces.Based on macroscopic surface features observed, including beach marks, the approximate direction of propagation p was determined.The final fracture f location is also labelled.Due to extensive mechanical damage observed on both fracture surfaces, the precise location of the fracture origin could not be identified.The macroscopic surface features observed on the fracture surface indicate the component fractured due to fatigue.The surface near the neck of the stem shows explantation damage.Stereo microscope imaging was also performed on the insert.Damage consistent with delamination and material loss was observed around the circumference of the insert, most likely a result of contact with the neck of the stem.Yellow discoloration consistent with absorption of synovial fluid was also observed.Review of exeter v40 stem 44 mm, catalogue # 0580-1-441 confirmed a fracture through the neck of the stem.Characterisation using stereo microscopy and scanning electron microscopy confirmed the component fracture propagated due to fatigue with the final fracture in overload.-clinician review: no medical records were received for review with a clinical consultant.-product history review: could not be performed as the device lot details were not provided.-complaint history review: could not be performed as the device lot details were not provided.Conclusions: it was reported that the patient was revised due to a fractured exeter stem.A material analysis was performed on the returned device and indicated the following: "stereo microscope imaging was performed on both the proximal and distal fracture surfaces.Based on macroscopic surface features observed, including beach marks, the approximate direction of propagation p was determined.The final fracture f location is also labelled.Due to extensive mechanical damage observed on both fracture surfaces, the precise location of the fracture origin could not be identified.The macroscopic surface features observed on the fracture surface indicate the component fractured due to fatigue.The surface near the neck of the stem shows explantation damage.Stereo microscope imaging was also performed on the insert.Damage consistent with delamination and material loss was observed around the circumference of the insert, most likely a result of contact with the neck of the stem.Yellow discoloration consistent with absorption of synovial fluid was also observed.Review of exeter v40 stem 44 mm, catalogue # 0580-1-441 confirmed a fracture through the neck of the stem.Characterisation using stereo microscopy and scanning electron microscopy confirmed the component fracture propagated due to fatigue with the final fracture in overload." no further investigation for this event is possible at this time.If additional information becomes available to indicate further evaluation is warranted, this record will be reopened.
|