|
Complaint 2 of 2.Visual inspection of the returned magec rod revealed that it was partially distracted with some wear/score marks consistent with expected markings due to incremental distraction.The wear/score marks observed on the distraction rod would indicate the distraction rod was extended approximately 25 mm from its initial position.X-ray images of the internal components showed a broken radial ball bearing.The rod was functionally tested; during testing the rod was unable to distract or retract with the manual distractor as well as the external remote controller (erc).The rod was therefore determined to be jammed.Sectioning of the rod determined that the distraction rod could not be separated from the housing tube without use of high force, which indicates the distraction rod was out of alignment.In addition, sectioning of the rod confirmed a broken radial ball bearing.It is possible, bending forces applied to the rod from patient anatomy/activity may have caused the distraction rod to become wedged into the housing tube/become out of alignment, which may be a cause for the broken radial ball bearing.Per the eifu, contraindications include: "patients and/or families unwilling or incapable of following postoperative care instructions." review of the device history records revealed no discrepancies related to this complaint.The rod was manufactured in accordance with the specified requirements and met all of the required quality inspections.
|