|
Please note the corrections to d1, d4 catalog # and d4 lot #.Please also note the correction to d9/h3 as the device was not returned for evaluation.The reported event could be confirmed, since nail breakage was confirmed on provided x-ray copies.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.In the case presented a 59 year-old male patient; 173 cm / 81 kg had initially been treated with a t2alpha retrograde nail which broke during a car accident - initial injury was sept 10 , 2020.He was revised with a t2alpha retrograde nail roughly a year ago, 1/7/22, ¿ which also broke, 1/5/23 was observed it was broken, and which is subject of above pi.Provided x-ray copies were sent to an health care practitioner for review.His comments in extracts: ¿the available x-ray copies revealed non-union after an implantation period of approx.1 year.A radiological metaphyseal gap of 2-3 cm, at the level of the broken locking screw hole, initially causing micro movements, and resulting in hypertrophic/partly atrophic non-union is a likely outcome.A nail, firmly connected to the implanted plate, could neither be confirmed nor excluded.¿.Based on investigation, the root cause was attributed to a patient related issue.The failure was caused by inappropriate bone healing contributed by suboptimal placement of the implant.H3 other text : device disposition unknown.
|