|
It was reported that, after a tka had been performed on an unknown date, the patient experienced discomfort that was addressed via revision surgery on (b)(6) 2022.A lgn ps high flex xlpe sz 5-6 11mm was replaced with a new one, since it was determined to be broken (a scope was performed to confirm that the poly was damaged.Poly was then removed using osteotomes and tweezers).The patient outcome is unknown.
|
|
H3, h6: the associated device was returned and evaluated.A visual inspection of the returned device confirmed the stated failure mode.The device was found to be fractured along the post, rendering the device inoperative.The device shows signs of prolonged use.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 per complaint details, a poly revision/swap was performed due to discomfort.Reportedly, a scope discovered the poly-post was broken and a new poly replaced the insert after removal using osteotomes and pickups(tweezers).It was communicated that the information requested was not provided.¿ without the requested documentation/information, the root cause of the reported discomfort could not be definitively concluded, although reportedly, the revision was due to the finding of a broken poly post.The patient impact beyond the reported discomfort, scope with findings and subsequent poly-swap/revision cannot be determined.The current patient status remains unknown.No further medical assessment can be rendered at this time.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.
|