It was reported that during tka, the surgeon selected a lgn rev tibia base sz 3 lt however, inside its external packing there was a package with a lgn rev tibia base sz 3 rt (71424013 lot: 18hm04753).When the internal package was opened it was verified that the implant had the description of the lgn rev tibia base sz 3 rt engraved and not the lgn rev tibia base sz 3 lt that was meant for use.A smith and nephew left tibial base size 4 was used to complete the surgery without significant delays.The patient was not harmed beyond the reported problem.
|
H3, h6: given the nature of the alleged incident, the device was not returned for evaluation, the pictures were reviewed, and could not confirm a product mix up.A review of the production order did not reveal a manufacturing abnormality that could have caused or contributed to the reported incident.This revealed that both products were created almost one year apart from each other, therefore, the product mix could not have occurred within smith & nephew's control of the identified batches.The clinical/medical investigation concluded that, based on the documentation provided, human error was a contributing factor; however, no clinical factors were identified which would have contributed to the reported event.The patient impact beyond the reported implantation of a larger-than-planned back-up tibial baseplate (sz 4 instead of the planned sz 3) and the reported 30 minute surgical extension could not be determined.It was documented on the complaint form that the patient was stable.No further medical assessment can be rendered at this time.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 label specification was performed and reveal that the external and internal package should include the same information for part number, lot number and part name.According to the sterile packaging inspection procedure it should be verify that laser etching of material and batch number on part matches material and batch on label and production order.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 that could contribute to the reported event include user error, mishandling or storage conditions.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.Should 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.
|