|
EXACTECH, INC. CC TIBIAL INSERT SZ 2, 15MM; PROSTHESIS, KNEE, PATELLOFEMOROTIBIAL, SEMI-CONSTRAINED, CEMENTED
|
Back to Search Results |
|
| Model Number |
CC TIBIAL INSERT SZ 2, 15MM |
| Medical Device Problem Codes |
Naturally Worn (2988); Loosening of Implant Not Related to Bone-Ingrowth (4002)
|
| Health Effect - Clinical Codes |
Failure of Implant (1924); Perforation of Vessels (2135); Osteolysis (2377)
|
| Date of Event |
03/25/2021
|
|
Type of Reportable Event
|
Serious Injury
|
|
Additional Manufacturer Narrative
|
|
Concomitant medical products: stem extension 160l x12 mm (cat# 204-32-16 / serial# (b)(4)).3" trocar, mod.Hex 2pk (cat# 201-78-81 / serial# (b)(4)).3" trocar, mod.Hex 2pk (cat# 201-78-81 / serial# (b)(4)).Trapezoid tibial tray sz 1f/2t, 2f/2t (cat# 204-04-22 / serial# (b)(4)).Three peg patella 32mm (cat# 200-02-32 / serial# (b)(4)).Additional information, including the product investigation, will be submitted within 30 days of receipt.
|
| |
|
Event or Problem Description
|
|
As reported by the legal team, in 2006, patient sought treatment for knee pain.At the recommendation of the orthopedic surgeon, she underwent knee replacement surgery on her right knee with an optetrak knee replacement system, including the defective insert and defective tibial tray.In 2008, less than two years after her knee replacement surgery, patient developed loosening of the device and pain in her right knee.On (b)(6) 2008, patient underwent a surgical revision of her right knee due to "failed right knee with a loose tibial component".At the time of surgery, it was discovered that patient right knee was also infected and, therefore, the optetrak knee replacement system and its components were removed while patient underwent treatment for the infection.Patient continued treatment for the infection until (b)(6) 2009, when another optetrak knee replacement system was implanted in her right knee, along with another defective insert.At that time, unbeknownst to patient, patient continued to have pain and instability in connection with her optetrak knee replacement system and, in (b)(6) 2012, it was determined that the device had again loosened and failed, and that, therefore, she was required to undergo another revision.On (b)(6) 2012, surgery was once again performed on patient's right knee.At this re-revision, another defective insert was implanted in patient's knee.Patient continued to have difficulty with her right knee, and, in march 2021, she switched her care to different hospital.On (b)(6) 2021, patient underwent another revision due to loosening and bone loss related to the defective insert.As a result of this revision surgery, patient's popliteal artery was severed, and patient continues to suffer from medical complications and risks.
|
| |
|
Additional Manufacturer Narrative
|
|
D10: concomitant products: stem extension 160l x12 mm (cat# 204-32-16 / serial# (b)(6)); 3" trocar, mod.Hex 2pk (cat# 201-78-81 / serial# (b)(6)); 3" trocar, mod.Hex 2pk (cat# 201-78-81 / serial# (b)(6)); trapezoid tibial tray sz 1f/2t, 2f/2t (cat# 204-04-22 / serial# (b)(6)); three peg patella 32mm (cat# 200-02-32 / serial# (b)(6)).The reason the revision reported cannot be confirmed from the information provided but may be the result of prosthesis wear and loosening or due to inclusion of the polyethylene in the packaging recall.However, the reported prosthesis wear and loosening could not be confirmed and potential contributions of user, or patient-related considerations to the event could not be assessed as the devices were not available for evaluation and no images, radiographs, or relevant clinical information was provided.
|
| |
|
Search Alerts/Recalls
|
|
|