• Decrease font size
  • Return font size to normal
  • Increase font size
U.S. Department of Health and Human Services

MAUDE Adverse Event Report: SMITH & NEPHEW, INC. ENGAGE TIBIAL ANCHOR STEM SZ 5-6; PROSTHESIS, KNEE, FEMOROTIBIAL, SEMI-CONSTRAINED, UNICOMPARTMENTAL/UNICONDYLAR,

  • Print
  • Share
  • E-mail
-
Super Search Devices@FDA
510(k) | DeNovo | Registration & Listing | Adverse Events | Recalls | PMA | HDE | Classification | Standards
CFR Title 21 | Radiation-Emitting Products | X-Ray Assembler | Medsun Reports | CLIA | TPLC
 

SMITH & NEPHEW, INC. ENGAGE TIBIAL ANCHOR STEM SZ 5-6; PROSTHESIS, KNEE, FEMOROTIBIAL, SEMI-CONSTRAINED, UNICOMPARTMENTAL/UNICONDYLAR, Back to Search Results
Catalog Number 1-10011-300
Medical Device Problem Code Adverse Event Without Identified Device or Use Problem (2993)
Health Effect - Clinical Codes Pain (1994); Implant Pain (4561)
Date of Event 12/13/2022
Type of Reportable Event Serious Injury
Additional Manufacturer Narrative
Internal complaint reference: (b)(4).
 
Event or Problem Description
It was reported that, six (6) months after an ukr had been performed about 6 months ago with an engage system, the patient was experiencing knee pain.The physician considered that the anchor might have been adding extra forces and stress in the tibia.An additional surgery was performed on (b)(6) 2022.Since the tibial component should have been grown in, the anchor was taken out to check if that helped mitigate the pain.The void was filled with bone graft.The rest of the prosthesis was left intact.Patient's current health status is undisclosed.
 
Additional Manufacturer Narrative
H3, h6: the device was not returned for evaluation; therefore, a device analysis could not be performed.The clinical/medical investigation concluded that, it was reported that six months post uni-compartmental knee replacement with the engage system, the surgeon removed the tibial component thinking it would help mitigate the patient¿s pain.As of the date of this medical investigation, the requested clinical documentation has not been provided for evaluation.Therefore, there were no clinical factors found which would have contributed to the reported event.The patient's current condition is unknown and the patient impact beyond that which has already been reported could not be determined.No further clinical assessment can be rendered at this time.Should additional clinical documentation become available in the future, the clinical/medical task may be re-evaluated.Device batch number was not provided, thus, an evaluation of the manufacturing records could not be performed.A review of complaint history for the previous 12 months did not reveal similar events for the listed device.A review of the instructions for use documents for engage partial knee system revealed that pain has been identified as adverse effects and complications.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 a similar event was identified due to a spike in the complaints where a revision surgery was performed, and determined that the primary root cause is: insufficient surgeon and medical education training program.Furthermore, there were limited resources available to engage to complete a more detailed surgeon training program.The following actions will be performed: build robust sales training and medical education program for engage products, deliver training to active surgeon users and hold quarterly surgeon training events.At this time, we have no reason to suspect that the product failed to meet any product specifications at the time of manufacture.With the results of this investigation the root cause of this event could not be determined.Factors that could contribute to the reported event include traumatic injury, joint tightness, patient condition or postoperative care.Based on this investigation, the need for corrective action is not indicated.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.
 
Additional Manufacturer Narrative
The device was not returned for evaluation; therefore, a device analysis could not be performed.The clinical/medical investigation concluded that, it was reported that six months post uni-compartmental knee replacement with the engage system, the surgeon removed the tibial component thinking it would help mitigate the patient¿s pain.As of the date of this medical investigation, the requested clinical documentation has not been provided for evaluation.Therefore, there were no clinical factors found which would have contributed to the reported event.The patient's current condition is unknown and the patient impact beyond that which has already been reported could not be determined.No further clinical assessment can be rendered at this time.Should additional clinical documentation become available in the future, the clinical/medical task may be re-evaluated.Device batch number was not provided, thus, an evaluation of the manufacturing records could not be performed.A review of complaint history for the previous 12 months did not reveal similar events for the listed device.A review of the instructions for use documents for engage partial knee system revealed that pain has been identified as adverse effects and complications.There is not enough data available to conclude that the overall clinical benefit outweighs the potential risk profile when compared to the state of the art.The existing data identifies a potential signal that the performance is an outlier vs the state of the art with respect to the risk for revision.In addition, a historical review concluded that no previous escalated actions for this type of issue were identified.However, as a correction action a voluntary market removal will be performed for the engage cementless partial knee system due recent complaint data that indicates that the revision rate may be trending higher than corresponding similar devices in global joint replacement registries.At this time, we have no reason to suspect that the product failed to meet any product specifications at the time of manufacture.With the results of this investigation the root cause of this event could not be determined.Factors that could contribute to the reported event include traumatic injury, joint tightness, patient condition or postoperative care.Based on this investigation, the need for corrective action may be indicated.
 
Search Alerts/Recalls

  New Search  |  Submit an Adverse Event Report

Brand Name
ENGAGE TIBIAL ANCHOR STEM SZ 5-6
Common Device Name
PROSTHESIS, KNEE, FEMOROTIBIAL, SEMI-CONSTRAINED, UNICOMPARTMENTAL/UNICONDYLAR,
Manufacturer (Section D)
SMITH & NEPHEW, INC.
1450 brooks rd.
memphis TN 38116
Manufacturer (Section G)
SMITH & NEPHEW, INC.
1450 brooks rd.
memphis TN 38116
Manufacturer Contact
holly topping
7000 west william cannon drive
austin, TX 78735
5123913905
MDR Report Key16098454
Report Number1020279-2023-00037
Device Sequence Number17846668
Product Code NJD
UDI-Device Identifier00885556873106
UDI-Public885556873106
Combination Product (Y/N)N
Initial Reporter StateNY
Initial Reporter CountryUS
PMA/510(K) Number
K190439
Number of Events Summarized1
Summary Report (Y/N)N
Device Implanted Year2022
Device Explanted Year2022
Reporter Type Manufacturer
Report Source Health Professional,Company Representative
Initial Reporter Occupation Physician
Remedial Action Recall
Type of Report Initial,Followup,Followup
Report Date (Section B) 06/26/2023
1 Device was Involved in the Event
1 Patient was Involved in the Event
Is this an Adverse Event Report? Yes
Is this a Product Problem Report? Yes
Operator of Device Health Professional
Device Catalogue Number1-10011-300
Device Lot NumberUNKNOWN
Was Device Available for Evaluation? No
Is the Reporter a Health Professional? Yes
Type of Report(Section G)Thirty-Day
Initial Date Received by Manufacturer 12/13/2022
Supplement Date Received by Manufacturer01/25/2023
06/23/2023
Initial Report FDA Received Date01/04/2023
Supplement Report FDA Received Date01/31/2023
06/26/2023
Was Device Evaluated by Manufacturer? (Y/N) Device Not Returned to Manufacturer
Is the Device Labeled for Single Use? (Y/N) Yes
Is This a Single-Use Device that was
Reprocessed and Reused on a Patient? (Y/N)
No
Usage of Device Initial
If action reported to FDA under 21 USC 360i(g), list
FDA-assigned Recall Number or include a statement
RES 92286
Patient Sequence Number1
Outcome Attributed to Adverse Event Hospitalization; Required Intervention;
Patient SexUnknown
-
-