|
It was reported that, after a left bhr was performed on (b)(6) 2012 due to severe osteoarthritis, the patient experienced elevated levels of cobalt and chromium in blood.This adverse event was treated with revision surgery on (b)(6) 2020, in which the bhr fem head was explanted and the bhr acetabular cup was retained.The next day, the patient fell and experienced a periprosthetic fracture, for which a second revision surgery was conducted on (b)(6) 2020.The implants placed in the first and second revision surgery are from another manufacturer.The bhr acetabular cup has not been explanted.The patient's current health condition is unknown.
|
|
It was reported that a left hip revision surgery was performed.As of today, the implanted devices, all of which were used in treatment have not been returned for evaluation.A review of the historical complaints data for the acetabular cup and the femoral head was performed using batch numbers to evaluate patterns of repeated failures or defects over the lifetime of the product and using part numbers and the reported failure modes to evaluate patterns of repeated failures or defects in a timeframe prior 12 months as of the complaint aware date.No other similar complaints were identified to involve this batch.Other similar complaints have been identified for the part number and the reported failure mode.However, as the device is no longer sold, no action is to be taken.In the absence of the actual devices, the production records were reviewed for the devices reportedly involved in this incident.All released devices involved met manufacturing specifications upon release for distribution review of the product ifu found adequate warnings and precautions in relation to the alleged failure modes.A risk management review was performed.The alleged failure modes and associated risks have been anticipated within the risk file and the anticipated risk level is still adequate.No further actions are required at this time.A review of historic escalation actions related to the products and similar complaint events was performed.Following the review, prior applicable escalation actions were identified and confirmed to reduce associated risks as far as possible.No further escalation actions required.The available medical documents were reviewed.With the limited information provided, the clinical root cause of the reported elevated metal ions and subsequent revision cannot be confirmed, and it cannot be concluded that the reported elevated ions were associated with a mal performance of the implant.There is no evidence the reported fall, periprosthetic femoral fracture and 2nd revision was related to the acetabular implant.The patient impact beyond the 1st revision and expected transient post-op convalescence period cannot be determined.Based on the information provided we cannot confirm or further investigate the reported complaint, our investigation remains inconclusive, and a definitive root cause cannot be determined.Specific factors known to contribute to the alleged fault are excessive physical activity levels, unreasonable stress on replacement system, excessive patient weight, trauma to the joint replacement.Should the devices or additional information be received, the complaint will be reopened.Based on this investigation, the need for corrective and preventative actions is not indicated.
|