|
It was reported that after a right tha performed on (b)(6) 2016 due to osteoarthritis, the patient experienced dislocation and component dissociation.The adverse event was addressed via revision surgery on (b)(6) 2017 and the journey uni tibinrt s5-6rm/ll8mm was exchange.This information was provided by the national joint registry of the united kingdom, as part of a retrospective data collection of patients who underwent a revision surgery of journey uni prothesis.As such, no further information will be available.
|
|
Section h10: 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 right revision was performed approximately 8 months post unicompartmental knee arthroplasty due to dislocation and component dissociation.As of the date of this medical investigation, the requested clinical documentation has not been received as the information was provided by the national joint registry of the united kingdom as part of a retrospective data collection, and reportedly, no further information will be available.In the absence of the requested medical documentation, no clinical factors were identified which would have contributed to the event.The patient impact beyond that which was reported could not be confirmed nor concluded; therefore, no further medical assessment can 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 revealed similar events for the listed device over the previous 12 months, but no similar events for the batch based on the historical data, this failure mode will be monitored for future complaints for any necessary corrective actions.A review of the instructions for use documents for knee systems revealed that dislocation as a result from trauma, improper implant selection, improper implant positioning, improper fixation, and/or migration of the components.Muscle and fibrous tissue laxity can also contribute to these conditions has been identified as a possible adverse effects.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.Possible causes could include but not limited to traumatic injury, limited range of motion, patient anatomy, surgical technique, size of device or abnormal loading of limb.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.Internal complaint reference number: (b)(4).
|