| Model Number |
3430-1380S |
| Medical Device Problem Codes |
Break (1069); Fracture (1260)
|
| Health Effect - Clinical Codes |
Failure of Implant (1924); Insufficient Information (4580)
|
| Date of Event |
01/19/2022
|
|
Type of Reportable Event
|
Serious Injury
|
|
Additional Manufacturer Narrative
|
|
Device will not be returned.If additional information becomes available, it will be provided on a supplemental report.
|
| |
|
Event or Problem Description
|
|
It was reported that a gamma nail was being implanted and broke."was a subtroch fracture nailed implant fracture at 2 months; revised to a proximal femoral replacement.".
|
| |
|
Additional Manufacturer Narrative
|
|
Device will not be returned.If additional information becomes available, it will be provided on a supplemental report.
|
| |
|
Event or Problem Description
|
|
It was reported that a gamma nail was being implanted and broke."was a subtroch fracture nailed implant fracture at 2 months; revised to a proximal femoral replacement.".
|
| |
|
Additional Manufacturer Narrative
|
|
The reported event could be confirmed, since the product was returned for evaluation and matches the alleged failure mode.The device inspection revealed the following: the received device was found to be broken around the proximal region at the point of the lag screw insertion hole.Significant drill marks were found at the lateral entrance of the hole along the posterior side and then progressing through the bore towards medial.The surface revealed that the breakage originated from the posterior web.Bearing points of lag screw at the distal part showed slight deformation, indicating towards high compressive load.The initial smooth surface as well as the appearance of lines of rest/waves confirmed the breakage to be a fatigue fracture.Also, the fracture pattern suggests that after a while the breakage was abrupt.The breakage initiated in a fatigue manner from the posterior web but broke in a much quicker manner from the anterior web due to high tension.A review of the device history for the reported lot did not indicate any abnormalities.No corrective actions are required at this time.No indications of material, manufacturing or design related problems were found during the investigation.A review of the labeling did not indicate any abnormalities.The optec states that: ¿in the event the nail is damaged during lag screw reaming, the fatigue strength of the implant may be reduced, which may cause nail to fracture.¿ based on the above investigation and the available information, the root cause of the issue is a combination of both user and patient related, but predominantly user related due to the nature of intra-op damage to nail which may have led to weakening of the nail initially.There was deformation observed as well on the medial side of the nail at the lag screw bearing point, indicating towards high compressive load (most likely patient related).If any further information is provided, the complaint report will be updated.
|
| |
|
Event or Problem Description
|
|
It was reported that a gamma nail was being implanted and broke."was a subtroch fracture nailed - implant fracture at 2 months - revised to a proximal femoral replacement.".
|
| |
|
Additional Manufacturer Narrative
|
|
Correction: please refer to h1 summary report & h1 number of events summarized.Please note the h1 summary report tab and h1 number of events summarized tab were selected in error.
|
| |
|
Event or Problem Description
|
|
It was reported that a gamma nail was being implanted and broke."was a subtroch fracture nailed - implant fracture at 2 months - revised to a proximal femoral replacement.".
|
| |
|
Search Alerts/Recalls
|