|
Correction d4 (lot#).The reported event could be confirmed for the loosening but could not be confirmed for the infection since the device was not returned for evaluation and no other evidences were provided.Since x-ray was provided, the opinion of the medical expert was requested and stated as following: "the x-ray indeed shows a humeral implant that has migrated into varus.The outline of its index position (how it was positioned during the primary placement) is still visible.Such an event confirms loosening, but is doesn't necessarily indicate infection since this kind of information is not available at this moment, i cannot assess the reasons for this diagnosis of periprosthetic joint infection".More detailed information about the complaint event as well as the affected device must be available in order to determine the root cause of the complaint event.However, based on the clinical opinion on the potential risk of infection caused by sterile packed stryker implants and instruments, ¿any kind of surgery bears the risk of infection.In trauma and orthopedic surgery with external or internal fixation implants or endoprostheses the infection risk varies between 0.5 % and 5 %, exceptionally up to 10 % and beyond, mainly depending on the respective surgical procedure and the typical patient population.¿ a review of the device history for the reported lot did not indicate any abnormalities.No corrective actions are required at this time.A review of the labeling did not indicate any abnormalities.No indications of material, manufacturing or design related problems were found during the investigation.If the device is returned or if any additional information is provided, the investigation will be reassessed.
|