|
It was reported that the plaintiff underwent a revision surgery of the right hip on (b)(6) 2021 secondary to squeaking noise, metallosis, elevated metal ion levels and pain.During the revision, the cup was preserved, and the femoral head was explanted.The system was converted to a tha.The patient tolerated the procedure well.The primary right hip bhr procedure was performed on (b)(6) 2010.
|
|
H3, h6: ¿it was reported that the plaintiff underwent a revision surgery of the right hip on (b)(6) 2021 secondary to squeaking noise, metallosis, elevated metal ion levels and pain.During the revision, the cup was preserved, and the femoral head was explanted.The devices, used in treatment, were not available for analysis.As no device batch numbers were provided for investigation for the acetabular cup and the femoral head, a manufacturing record review, device labelling / ifu review could not be performed.If more information is received, this investigation will be reopened.Without a definitive batch number, a complete review of the historical complaints data cannot be performed for the acetabular cup and femoral head.A review of historical complaints data was performed 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.Similar complaints have been identified for the part number and the reported failure mode for both devices and this will continue to be monitored.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.A review of historic escalation actions related to the products and similar complaint events was performed.Following the review, no prior applicable escalation actions were identified.With the information provided the clinical root cause of the reported pain, noise and metallosis cannot be confirmed.It cannot be concluded the reported clinical reactions/events were associated with a mal performance of the implant.The patient impact beyond the pain, revision and expected convalescence period cannot be determined.Based on the available information we can confirm the reported complaint, however without further information 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, loosening of components may increase production of wear particles and accelerate damage to the bone.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.
|