| Catalog Number |
MC1314P |
| Medical Device Problem Code |
Adverse Event Without Identified Device or Use Problem (2993)
|
| Health Effect - Clinical Codes |
Hemorrhage/Blood Loss/Bleeding (1888); Discomfort (2330); Appropriate Clinical Signs, Symptoms and Conditions Term/Code Not Available (4581)
|
| Date of Event |
06/23/2022
|
|
Type of Reportable Event
|
Serious Injury
|
|
Additional Manufacturer Narrative
|
|
Without a product return, no product evaluation is able to be conducted.Current information is insufficient to permit a valid conclusion about the cause of this event.If additional information is obtained that adds value to the relevant content of this report and/or a conclusion can be drawn, a follow-up report will be sent.Reference reports through 3004788213-2022-00057.
|
| |
|
Event or Problem Description
|
|
It was reported that during surgery, the surgeon felt there was a difference between the height of two different roi-c trial footprints, so elected to place a 1 mm taller cage.Then immediately post-operatively, the patient felt unwell, had difficulty breathing, and heavy bleeding.The patient was returned to the or where the cage was removed, the area and clot were cleaned out, and a new cage was installed so the patient was out of danger.This is report one of three for this event.
|
| |
|
Event or Problem Description
|
|
It was reported that during surgery, the surgeon felt there was a difference between the height of two different roi-c trial footprints, so elected to place a 1mm taller cage.Then immediately post-operatively, the patient felt unwell, had difficulty breathing, and heavy bleeding.The patient was returned to the or where the cage was removed, the area and clot were cleaned out, and a new cage was installed so the patient was out of danger.This is report one of three for this event.
|
| |
|
Additional Manufacturer Narrative
|
|
Additional information in h6: component, investigation type, findings, and conclusions.Device evaluation: the returned device (mc1314p) matches the information in the complaint file and was examined.Visual inspection revealed that the cage was fractured.The fracture may have occurred during the revision surgery since it is not mentioned in the complaint description.Potential cause: root cause was unable to be determined.This event could possibly be attributed to wear through use over time or multiple sterilization cycles for the trials.Dhr review: per dhr review, the parts were likely conforming when they left zimvie control.Device use these devices are used for treatment.If additional information is obtained that adds value to the relevant content of this report, a follow-up report will be sent.
|
| |
|
Search Alerts/Recalls
|