|
SMITH & NEPHEW, INC. POROUS TIBIAL TRAY SIZE 5-LEFT MEDIAL; PROSTHSISKNEFMROTBIALSMICONSTRANDUNCOMPRTMNTLUNCNDLARUNCMNTDPORUSCOATDMTALPOLYMR
|
Back to Search Results |
|
| Catalog Number |
1-10012-500 |
| Medical Device Problem Code |
Premature Separation (4045)
|
| Health Effect - Clinical Code |
No Clinical Signs, Symptoms or Conditions (4582)
|
| Date of Event |
12/06/2021
|
|
Type of Reportable Event
|
Serious Injury
|
|
Event or Problem Description
|
|
It was reported that, during uka surgery, the tibial anchor was implanted with the joint in extension, and the surgeon did not notice any gap between the tibial tray and the tibial bone surface, as they both appear to sit flush.When going to joint flexion, the porous tibial tray size 5-left medial pop up in the back, and a gap between the tibial tray and the tibial bone surface was evident.After this incident, the surgeon decided to remove the tibial anchor and a change in surgical technique was performed to switch to a cemented tibial tray.The patient's outcome is unknown.
|
| |
|
Additional Manufacturer Narrative
|
|
H3, h6: the device was not returned for evaluation and the reported event could not be confirmed.A review of the manufacturing records did not reveal a manufacturing abnormality that could have caused or contributed to the reported incident.A review of complaint history for the part number over the past 12 months and for the batch number based on historical data of the device did not reveal similar events for the listed device.A review of the instructions for use documents for engage partial knee system revealed that the success of the operation depends on compliance with the operative technique supplied, and the proper use of the instrumentation supplied has been identified in the warnings and precautions.A review of the risk management file revealed this failure mode was previously identified.The anticipated risk level is still adequate.A historical review concluded that there are no prior actions related to this product and event.At this time, we have no reason to suspect that the product failed to meet any product specifications at the time of manufacture.Possible causes could include but not limited to surgical technique used, size of device or user/procedural variance.The contribution of the device to the reported event could not be corroborated.Based on this investigation, the need for corrective action is not indicated.Without the return of the actual product involved, our investigation could not proceed.Should the device or additional information be received, the complaint will be reopened.No further investigation is warranted for this complaint; however, we will continue to monitor for future complaints and investigate as necessary.We consider this investigation closed.
|
| |
|
Search Alerts/Recalls
|
|
|