Manufacturing site evaluation: the device was not returned to the manufacturer for physical evaluation.Additionally, no on-site evaluation of the unit was performed and no parts were returned for failure analysis.Therefore, the investigation was not able to confirm a device issue that could be associated with the reported event.Batch history review: the device history records (dhr) were reviewed for the reported lot number; the device was found to be within specification at the time of production.All device history records (dhr) are reviewed and released according to documented procedures and a device is not released if it does not meet requirements or is nonconforming.No similar complaints were identified against the same lot number with a similar reported event.Conclusion: a definitive conclusion regarding the complaint incident cannot be reached without a physical examination of the complaint device.There is no indication of a material defect, manufacturing failure, or design error on the basis of the device history record.For further investigation, examination of the complaint device is required.
|
It was reported to aesculap ag that a as femur extens.Stem 6° d12x77 cemented (part # nr291z) was implanted during a left knee revision surgery performed on (b)(6) 2018.According to the complainant, post-operative bone deterioration of femur and tibia occurred.The complaint device has not been returned to the manufacturer for evaluation.An additional medical intervention was required.A revision in the future is likely, according to the patient.The malfunction is filed under aag reference (b)(4).Associated medwatch reports: 400554585 - nr191z (9610612-2022-00142).400554587 - nr565z (9610612-2022-00144).400554588 - nr565z (9610612-2022-00145).400554589 - nr611m (9610612-2022-00146).400554590 - nr071z (9610612-2022-00147).400554591 - nr005z (9610612-2022-00148).400554592 - nr400z (9610612-2022-00149).
|