It was reported that on literature review "which implant for proximal femoral osteotomy in children?.A comparison of the ao (asif) 90[degrees] fixed-angle blade plate and the richards intermediate hip screw", one (1) patient suffered from an overcorrection in transverse plane, after a primary osteotomy was performed, using the compression hip screw system.His hip was much improved in terms of stability, but he had a severe "out toed" gait.The fixation system was revised with another hip screw 6 months postoperatively.At follow-up, his hip stability and gait were both satisfactory.No further information is available.
|
H3, h6: given the nature of the alleged incident, the device was not returned for evaluation and the reported event could not be confirmed.The clinical/medical investigation concluded that 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.Based on a review of the information provided, the information in this literature review was presented as a comparison between two implant¿s performances in a large series of children with proximal femoral osteotomies.Per report, the patient was overcorrected in the transverse plane post primary osteotomy with the compression hip screw the patient had much improved stability.According to the report, the patient¿s fixation system was revised with another hip screw at 6 months post-operatively as treatment for the reported ¿out toed¿ gait.The images and/or graphs provided in the article have been interpreted within the text; therefore, no further analysis of the images and/or graphs is required.The impact to the patient was the overcorrection/in transverse plane, the severe ¿out toed¿ gait, the reported revision.Since it was reported, at the patient¿s follow-up his stability and gait were both satisfactory, no further clinical/medical assessment is warranted at this time.Should any additional relevant medical information be provided, this case would be re-assessed.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 surgical technique used, user/procedural variance, or surgical/post operative complications.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.
|