|
ARTHREX, INC. USP II HUMERAL HEAD 40/17; PROSTHESIS, SHOULDER, SEMI-CONSTRAINED, METAL/POLYMER CEMENTED
|
Back to Search Results |
|
| Model Number |
USP II HUMERAL HEAD 40/17 |
| Medical Device Problem Code |
Patient Device Interaction Problem (4001)
|
| Health Effect - Clinical Codes |
Pain (1994); Loss of Range of Motion (2032)
|
| Date of Event |
06/28/2022
|
|
Type of Reportable Event
|
Serious Injury
|
|
Additional Manufacturer Narrative
|
|
The contribution of the device to the reported event could not be determined as the device was not returned for evaluation.The root cause of the event could not be determined from the information available and without device evaluation.If the device becomes available for evaluation, a follow-up report will be submitted.
|
| |
|
Event or Problem Description
|
|
On january 9th, 2023, a clindex notification was received indicating that a severe complication occurred of a patient listed on the shoulder arthroplasty registry.Patient underwent total shoulder procedure on (b)(6) 2021, in which the arthrex univers apex implant set was used.A year later, patent complaint of pain and motion limitation.On (b)(6) 2022, a revision took place for arthroscopic debridement and nerve release of the suprascapular notch.No additional information has been reported as of now.Additional information received on 1/10/2023: the following arthrex products were implanted during the original procedure: arthrex univers ll humeral head, part number: ar-9140-17p, lot: 170024021.Arthrex universe apex humeral stem, part number: ar-9100-05s, lot: 10193799.Univers vaultlock glenoid small part number: ar-9106-01, lot: 1027262023.All remain implanted in the patient, as nothing was explanted during the revision surgery.Both surgeries were performed by the same surgeon at the same facility.
|
| |
|
Additional Manufacturer Narrative
|
|
Additional information: g3, h3, h6.The complaint is not confirmed by the photos the customer provided, showing the shoulder implants.Based on additional information no implants were replaced during revision surgery.However, without the return of the device for physical evaluation, the most likely cause for the reported failure can be attributed to a patient-specific event.
|
| |
|
Search Alerts/Recalls
|
|
|