|
The reported event could not be confirmed.The device inspection revealed the following: the identification of the device was confirmed based on the catalog # and the lot # marked.The coated part of the stem is heavily worn out, with multiple scratches, occurring most probably during explantation.Bone can also be observed on the coated surface, giving indication of osseointegration.One of the holes of the stem is worn out, indicating that the implant may have been not fully aligned or correctly assembled with the broach during the press-fit insertion.The wear observed may have led to the creation of metal debris in the patient.Despite the observations made, the device itself does not give evidence of the reported metallosis as no picture of the patient was received.It was not possible to link the implant wear and the possible creation of metal debris with the reported metallosis, as not enough information was provided in this case.Studies concluded that the "metal wear particles consisting of tiaiv are typically very small (a mean size of 0.1 +/- 0.15 micron) in order to be able to provoke such a response".In the event at hand, the sizes of the particles are not an information that has been provided.Furthermore, as indicated by medical experts, "metallosis is about the type-iv immune response to the accumulation of metal particles within tissues.There are cases of early arthroplasty failure due to metallosis, yet these patients usually do well initially and start to get pain and joint stiffness after months, leading to revision within 2 years.".However, the reported metallosis was observed after 6 weeks of implantation, a post-surgical lapse of time much shorter than what is usually observed for such response.This gives further indication of the lack of evidence pointing towards metallosis and the impossibility to confirm the reported event.Based on investigation, the root cause was attributed to an user related issue.The wear observed on the implant is most probably related to mishandling of the device during implantation and explantation.A review of the device history for the reported lot did not indicate any abnormalities.No corrective actions are required at this time.A review of the labeling did not indicate any abnormalities.No indications of material, manufacturing or design related problems were found during the investigation.If more information is provided, the case will be reassessed.
|