|
SMITH & NEPHEW ORTHOPAEDICS LTD ACETLR CUP HAP 56MM W/ IMPTR; PROSTHESIS, HIP, SEMI-CONSTRAINED, METAL/METAL, RESURFACING
|
Back to Search Results |
|
| Model Number |
74120156 |
| Medical Device Problem Codes |
Biocompatibility (2886); Insufficient Device Problem Information (3190)
|
| Health Effect - Clinical Codes |
Metal Related Pathology (4530); Insufficient Information (4580)
|
| Date of Event |
03/21/2022
|
|
Type of Reportable Event
|
Serious Injury
|
|
Additional Manufacturer Narrative
|
|
Complaint reference number: (b)(4).
|
| |
|
Event or Problem Description
|
|
It was reported that, after a bhr system had been implanted on an unspecified date, the plaintiff experienced an unspecified adverse event that was addressed via revision surgery on (b)(6) 2022.No additional information was provided.
|
| |
|
Additional Manufacturer Narrative
|
|
It was reported that a revision surgery was performed due to an unspecified adverse event.As of today, the implanted devices, all of which were used in treatment have not been returned for evaluation.As no device part and batch numbers were provided for investigation, a complaint history review, manufacturing record review, or definite escalation actions review could not be performed.A review of the product¿s instructions for use was not possible due to limited information about the details of the event and device.Without basic part details or an alleged failure mode, no risk file review is possible.No further actions are required at this time.If more information is received, this investigation will be reopened.The requested supporting clinical documentation has not been provided; therefore, there were no clinical factors found which would have contributed to the unspecified complications.With the limited information provided, the patient impact beyond the reported revision cannot be determined.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.Based on the limited information provided we are unable to speculate on specific factors known to contribute to the alleged fault.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.
|
| |
|
Additional Manufacturer Narrative
|
|
H3, h6.It was reported that a revision surgery was performed due to elevated metal ion levels and pain.As of today, the implanted devices, all of which were used in treatment have not been returned for evaluation.Without a definitive batch number, a complete review of the historical complaints data cannot be performed for the device.A review of historical complaints data was performed using the part numbers and the reported failure modes to evaluate patterns of repeated failures or defects.Similar complaints have been identified for the cup and the head, and this failure will continue to be monitored.As no device batch numbers were provided for investigation, manufacturing record review could not be performed.If more information is received, this investigation will be reopened.The review of the most recent 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, no prior applicable escalation actions were identified.The available medical documents were reviewed.Although elevated metal ions were reported, no laboratory values or laboratory reports were provided.With the limited information provided the clinical root cause of the reported metallosis cannot be definitively confirmed.However, the implantation angle of his acetabular cup in slightly less anteversion than his bony acetabulum and/or revision finding of significant retroversion of his acetabulum due to his previous acetabular osteotomy cannot be ruled out as possible contributing factors to his reported pain and clinical status.It cannot be concluded the reported metallosis was associated with a mal performance of the implant or implant failure.The patient impact beyond the pain, revision, and expected transient post-op convalescence period cannot be determined.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.
|
| |
|
Additional Manufacturer Narrative
|
|
Additional information: a2, b5, b7, d1, d4, d6a, d10, h6 b3, d6b, g2.
|
| |
|
Event or Problem Description
|
|
It was reported that, after a bhr resurfacing system had been implanted on patient right hip on (b)(6) 2015 due to advanced degenerative arthritis, the plaintiff experienced revision surgery on (b)(6) 2022 due to elevated metal ion levels and pain.During the revision, evidence of metallosis in the capsule and small pseutotumor medially were found.Femoral head and cup were explanted and exchanged for competitor devices.Patient awoken from anesthesia and transferred to recovery room in stable condition.
|
| |
|
Search Alerts/Recalls
|
|
|