|
It was reported that, after a tka surgery had been performed around 9 years ago, a revision surgery was performed on (b)(6) 2022 due to a sustained periprosthetic fracture of the femur after the patient had a fall and fractured the femoral condyles.Due to the fracture and the collateral ligaments being compromised, the surgeon elected to remove all components and replace them with a hinge type revision system.The current health status of patient is unknown.
|
|
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 revision surgery was performed approximately 9 years post gii implantation due to a sustained periprosthetic femur fracture/fractured femoral condyles following a fall.Reportedly, the collateral ligaments were compromised as well, and the patient was revised to a hk-type revision system.It was communicated that the patient fall was ¿obviously painful¿ and that the requested clinical documentation and/or current patient status was not available.Although the fall was reportedly the root cause of the event, without the requested clinical documentation, this could not be further assessed; however, there has been no indication of a malperformance of the tka prostheses reported.The patient impact beyond the reported periprosthetic femoral fracture/fractured femoral condyles secondary to the painful fall and subsequent revision/conversion to a hk-type system 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 that tibia, femur, or patella fractures can occur has been identified as a possible adverse effect.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 potential causes that could contribute to the reported event include excessive forces applied to implant and/or traumatic injury.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.
|