| Model Number |
CDM-625 |
| Medical Device Problem Code |
Patient-Device Incompatibility (2682)
|
| Health Effect - Clinical Code |
Inadequate Pain Relief (2388)
|
| Date of Event |
01/24/2023
|
|
Type of Reportable Event
|
Serious Injury
|
|
Additional Manufacturer Narrative
|
|
A review of the lot history record, h80002145, for the device did not reveal any non-conformances to specification or deviations in procedure.The device met the m6-c product specifications including the axial stiffness and flexural resistance specifications.The risk management files were reviewed and no new risks were identified.
|
| |
|
Event or Problem Description
|
|
Information provided states the patient experienced pain and lysis zone could be seen in the bone 13 years post implant of an m6-c prosthesis.The patient had been diagnosed with multiple sclerosis at the time of initial implant in 2010.The m6-c was explanted.
|
| |
|
Event or Problem Description
|
|
Information provided states the patient experienced pain and lysis zone could be seen in the bone 13 years post implant of an m6-c prosthesis.The patient had been diagnosed with multiple sclerosis at the time of initial implant in 2010.The m6-c was explanted.
|
| |
|
Additional Manufacturer Narrative
|
|
A review of the lot history record, h80002145, for the device did not reveal any non-conformances to specification or deviations in procedure.The device met the m6-c product specifications including the axial stiffness and flexural resistance specifications.The risk management files were reviewed and no new risks were identified.Based on the inspection of the retrieved m6-c, in conjunction with the clinical data and images provided, this device had failed mechanically at the time of removal.The device had collapsed and in vivo damage was noted to the sheath, fiber construct, and core.Large cystic bony changes were observed on the pre-revision imaging, were consistent with the reported osteolysis, histopathology, wear of the fiber construct, and the fiber filaments visible on the outer surfaces of the endplates.With no interim radiographs were provided, the sequelae of events that led to the failure of this procedure is unknown.
|
| |
|
Search Alerts/Recalls
|