|
The agent reported "(the stem had loosened.Since it had to be replaced doctor went to 36mm for head and insert)".The previous surgery and the surgery detailed in this event occurred 4 years apart.This evaluation is limited in scope as the items associated with this investigation were not returned to djo surgical - austin for examination.The surgery was completed as intended and without incident.If additional information regarding the reported event is submitted at a future date, this investigation will be re-evaluated.There was no information submitted with this complaint about any patient activities, accidents, or medical contraindications that may have contributed to the reported event.There were no findings during this evaluation that indicate the reported devices were defective.The surgeon performed this procedure to remedy the patient's condition.No further action is deemed necessary.The root cause of this complaint was a revision surgery due to loosening.No information was submitted with the complaint regarding pre-existing conditions of the patient or any activities the patient was involved in that may have contributed to the event.There are multiple factors that may also contribute to an event that are outside the control of djo surgical such as poor bone density, prolonged overhead activities, inadequate soft tissue support, patient activities.Inventory containment is not required as there are no indications of a product or process issue affecting implant safety or effectiveness.The revision surgery was completed successfully.A review of the device history records (dhr) show that the reported components used in the previous surgery, when released for use, met design and manufacturing requirements.First, there was a nonconformance associated with the main part which documents that out of 10 parts lot, 1 part was rejected and scrapped on router.Second, there was a ncmr associated with the concomitant part, which documents that out of 15 parts lot, all parts were rejected due to no edge break or sharp edge.Later the rejected parts were reworked and accepted after proper justification.Out of 15 rejected parts, all parts were rejected due to out of tolerance.Later the rejected parts were accepted to use as is after proper justification.All other items in the lot were met with the design, fit and function requirements.The devices were verified to have gone through an acceptable sterilization process and were within its expiration date at the time of the previous surgery.Customer complaint history of the reported devices showed no present trends or on-going issues that are needing a review.
|