|
It was reported that the plaintiff underwent a right revision surgery on (b)(6) 2022 due to a failed hip arthroplasty secondary to metallosis, and neurologic symptoms.The primary right hip surgery was performed on (b)(6) 2010.During the revision surgery, trunnion with minimal corrosion was found.The surgeon decided to replace the metal liner and the modular femoral head, and to retain the primary cup and femoral component.The patient was transferred to the recovery room in stable condition.
|
|
H3, h6: it was reported that the patient underwent a right revision surgery due to a failed hip arthroplasty secondary to metallosis, and neurologic symptoms.During the revision surgery, trunnion with minimal corrosion was found.The surgeon decided to replace the metal liner and the modular femoral head, and to retain the primary cup and femoral component.As of today, the implanted devices, all of which were used in treatment have not been returned for evaluation.A review of the historical complaints data for the devices concerned was performed using batch numbers, part numbers and the reported failure modes to evaluate patterns of repeated failures or defects.Similar complaints have been identified for the liner.No other similar complaints have been identified for the modular head and sleeve.This will continue to be monitored via routine trending, however it should be noted that this device is no longer sold.In the absence of the actual devices, the production records were reviewed for the devices reportedly involved in this incident.All released devices involved met manufacturing specifications upon release for distribution.The review of the product ifu found adequate warnings and precautions in relation to the alleged failure modes.A risk management review was performed.The alleged failure modes and associated risks have been anticipated within the risk file and the anticipated risk level is still adequate.No further actions are required at this time.A review of historic escalation actions related to the products and similar complaint events was performed.Following the review, prior applicable escalation actions were identified and confirmed to reduce associated risks as far as possible.No further escalation actions are required.The available medical documentation was reviewed.The patients history of ehlers-danlos syndrome cannot be ruled out as a contributing factor to the patients clinical status.The intraoperative findings of minimal corrosion on the trunnion may be consistent with metal debris; however, with the limited information provided the clinical root cause of the reported ¿metallosis and neurologic symptoms¿ cannot be confirmed.It cannot be concluded the reported events were associated with a mal performance of the implant or implant failure.The patient had a second revision 8-months post revision, due to recurrent anterior hip/groin pain.Based on the information provided, further investigation of the reported complaint cannot be carried out and remains inconclusive.A definitive root cause cannot be determined.Specific factors known to contribute to the alleged fault are excessive physical activity levels, unreasonable stress on replacement system, excessive patient weight, trauma to the joint replacement, loosening of components may increase production of wear particles and accelerate damage to the bone.Should the devices or additional information be received, the complaint will be reopened.Based on this investigation, the need for corrective and preventative actions is not indicated.
|