|
EXACTECH, INC. OPTETRAK HI-FLEX TIBIAL INSERT SZ 5 9MM; PROSTHESIS, KNEE, PATELLOFEMOROTIBIAL, SEMI-CONSTRAINED, CEMENTED
|
Back to Search Results |
|
| Model Number |
244-25-09 |
| Medical Device Problem Code |
Naturally Worn (2988)
|
| Health Effect - Clinical Codes |
Failure of Implant (1924); Insufficient Information (4580)
|
| Date of Event |
03/01/2022
|
|
Type of Reportable Event
|
Serious Injury
|
|
Additional Manufacturer Narrative
|
|
Pending investigation.H7: z-0019-2022.
|
| |
|
Event or Problem Description
|
|
During the week of (b)(6), representatives of exactech, inc.And exactech spain conducted an inperson site visit with (b)(6) hospital.As a result of that site visit and at exactech's request, the hospital provided a retrospective excel listing of revision related to polyethylene wear that have been performed since 2010.These cases have not previously been reported to exactech as complaints.This patient (b)(6) was implanted with a 244-25-09-inserto tib ps hi-flex 5, 9mm, serial number (b)(6) on (b)(6)2013.The insert was manufactured on 10/17/2011 and was packaged in a vacuum bag with no evoh.The insert was manufactured on 10/17/2011 and was 1.3689253935660506 years shelf age at the time of implant.On (b)(6)2022, approximately 9.0 years post implantation, the patient underwent revision for wear of the polyethylene.No additional details are available at this time.
|
| |
|
Additional Manufacturer Narrative
|
|
H3: the revision reported may have been due to third body wear, patient-related conditions, instability, and/or malalignment between the femoral and tibial components, which led to prosthesis wear.However, this cannot be confirmed as the device was not available for evaluation and images of the explanted device/radiographs were not provided.
|
| |
|
Additional Manufacturer Narrative
|
|
This follow-up report is being submitted to relay additional and/or corrected information.The revision reported may have been due to third body wear, patient-related conditions, instability, and/or malalignment between the femoral and tibial components, which led to prosthesis wear.However, this cannot be confirmed as the device was not available for evaluation and images of the explanted device/radiographs were not provided.If any further information is obtained that would change or alter any information provided, a supplemental report will be filed accordingly.
|
| |
|
Search Alerts/Recalls
|
|
|