|
It was reported that, after a tkr surgery performed in an unspecified date, a revision surgery was performed on (b)(6) 2023, in where the surgeon noticed that the post on ps insert was broken.This device was explanted and replaced with a new insert.The current health status of the patient is unknown.
|
|
It was reported that, after a tkr surgery performed in an unspecified date, the patient was experiencing instability.A revision surgery was performed on (b)(6) 2023, in where the surgeon noticed that the post on lgn ps high flex xlpe sz 7-8 9mm was broken.This device was explanted and replaced with a new insert.Patient was fine at the time of surgery.
|
|
H3, h6: the device was not returned for evaluation.However, the photographs were reviewed, and revealed that the post of the device fractured.The device shows signs of use.The clinical/medical investigation concluded that, this case reports, after a total knee arthroplasty was performed on an unspecified date, a revision was performed.Reportedly, a broken post was found and replaced with a new insert during the surgery.No reported symptoms or adverse events were reported leading to the revision.As of the date of this medical investigation, the requested clinical documentation has not been provided; therefore, there were no clinical factors found which would have contributed to the event.The patient impact beyond the reported events and revisions cannot be determined and the patient¿s current health status is unknown.Therefore, no further clinical/medical assessment is warranted.A review of the production order did not reveal a manufacturing abnormality that could have caused or contributed to the reported incident.A review of complaint history revealed similar events for the listed device over the previous 12 months, but no similar events for the batch based on the historical data, this failure mode will be monitored for future complaints for any necessary corrective actions.A review of the instructions for use documents for knee systems revealed that the implant can break or become damaged as a result of strenuous activity or trauma.The patient should be warned that the device does not replace normal healthy bone, this has been identified as warnings and precautions.A review of the risk management file revealed this failure mode was previously identified.The anticipated risk level is still adequate.A historical review concluded that there are no prior actions related to this product and event.According with inspection drawing, the final inspection includes the verification of part configuration per print.Also, per material specification, the quality and manufacture of polyethylene bar stock shall be controlled.At this time, we have no reason to suspect that the product failed to meet any specifications at the time of manufacture.Factors that could contribute to the reported event include patient anatomy, abnormal loading of limb, excessive forces and/or traumatic injury.Based on this investigation, the need for corrective action is not indicated.Should the device or additional information be received, the complaint will be reopened.No further investigation is warranted for this complaint; however, we will continue to monitor for future complaints and investigate as necessary.We consider this investigation closed.
|