|
It was reported that, after a tka was performed in 2018, the patient experienced pain.A revision surgery was performed on (b)(6) 2022 in order to solve this adverse event.During the surgery, it was discovered that the gns ii por fem size 6 left had no bone on/in-growth, while the gns ii cmt tib size 5 {} left was found to be well fixed and it was removed per usual.Both gns ii por fem size 6 left and gns ii cmt tib size 5 {} left were revised with similar sized legion revision with 220 stems, and the patella was retained.The patient's current health status is unknown.
|
|
H3, h6: the device was not returned for evaluation and the reported event could not be confirmed.The clinical/medical investigation concluded that, per complaint details, a left total knee arthroplasty revision was performed approximately 4 years post implantation due to pain and it was found intraoperatively that the cementless femoral component had no bone on/in-growth.The requested medical documentation has not been received as of the date of this medical investigation and the current patient status is unknown.Without the requested clinical documentation, the root cause of the reported events could not be further assessed.The patient impact beyond the reported pain, inadequate bone in-growth and subsequent revision with long stems could not be determined.No further medical assessment could be rendered at this time.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 knee systems revealed that postoperative therapy should be structured to prevent excessive loading of the operative knee and to encourage bone healing, besides, periodic, long-term follow-up is recommended to monitor the position and state of the prosthetic components, as well as the condition of the adjoining bone have been identified as warnings and precautions postoperative.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.Factors and/or some potential probable causes that could contribute to the reported event have been identified as overuse or excessive pressure on the joint, procedural/user error, surgical/post operative complications, healing issues and/or patient condition.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.
|