|
SMITH & NEPHEW, INC. GII PS HI FLEX ISRT SZ 3-4 11; PROSTHESIS, KNEE, PATELLOFEMOROTIBIAL, SEMI-CONSTRAINED, CEMENTED, POLYMER/METAL
|
Back to Search Results |
|
| Model Number |
71421509 |
| Medical Device Problem Code |
Improper or Incorrect Procedure or Method (2017)
|
| Health Effect - Clinical Code |
Joint Laxity (4526)
|
| Date of Event |
09/26/2022
|
|
Type of Reportable Event
|
Serious Injury
|
|
Additional Manufacturer Narrative
|
|
Internal complaint reference: (b)(4).
|
| |
|
Event or Problem Description
|
|
It was reported that, after a tka surgery had been performed with a genesis ii system, the patient presented joint instability.A revision surgery was performed on (b)(6) 2022 to explant the gii ps hi flex isrt sz 3-4 11.It was found that during the implantation surgery, which had been conducted on (b)(6) 2008, such insert had been implanted on a gii cmt tib size 5 right: sizes did not match.It is unknown what the current health status of patient is.
|
| |
|
Additional Manufacturer Narrative
|
|
H3, h6: the associated device was returned and evaluated.A visual inspection of the returned device did not confirmed the stated failure mode.The device was found to be severely worn from prolonged use.The surface is also discolored likely from exposure to bodily fluids.A dimensional inspection was attempted, but the device was too damaged to obtain accurate measurements.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.The clinical/medical evaluation concluded that it was found that the original surgery performed on 10/09/2008 at tri-state memorial by dr.Timothy flock resulted in a 3-4 insert being implanted on a size 5 baseplate.It should be noted that the insert remained in situ for 14 years.As of the date of this medical investigation, the requested clinical documentation has not been provided; therefore, there were no clinical factors found which would have contributed to the event.The patient's current condition is unknown, and the patient impact beyond the instability and the revision surgery, could not be determined based on the limited information provided.Should any additional clinical information be provided, this complaint will be re-evaluated.A review of the manufacturing records did not reveal a manufacturing abnormality that could have caused or contributed to the reported incident.At this time, we do not have reason to suspect that the product failed to meet any product specifications at the time of manufacture.A review of the risk management files revealed this failure mode was previously identified.The anticipated risk level is still adequate.A review of ifu for knee systems revealed that the correct selection of the implant has been identified in warnings and precautions.The appropriate type and size should be selected for patients with consideration of anatomical and biomechanical factors.Assessment of historical escalated cases concluded that there are no prior actions related to this device and failure mode.The contribution of the device to the reported event could not be corroborated.A factor that could contribute to the reported event includes size selection.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 future complaints and investigate as necessary.We consider this investigation closed.
|
| |
|
Search Alerts/Recalls
|
|
|