|
It was reported that, after an internal fixation surgery of the hip was performed on (b)(6) 2022, the patient experienced breakage of the device.This adverse event was treated by a revision surgery on (b)(6) 2023, in which a intertan 10s 10mm x 42cm 125d left was explanted and a competitor device was implanted.Patient's current health status is unknown.
|
|
The device was not returned for evaluation.However, the photographs were reviewed, and revealed the device broke in two pieces.The clinical/medical investigation stated that the undated, unlabeled image shows the nail is broken at the lag/compression junction, and there also appears a femoral neck fracture but as the image is fluoro, it is not completely clear.In addition to the three undated/unlabeled photos of the explant device, they confirm the nail is broken at the lag/compression junction.However, without a comparison of the immediate post-implantation and the immediate pre-revision x-rays, we are unable to determine the definitive clinical root cause of the reported fracture.Although, we cannot rule out whether the appropriate size nail was selected during the primary procedure, trauma, bone quality or non-compliance with the physician¿s request to offload, as possible contributory factors to the reported failure.The impact to the patient beyond the reported fracture, revision and subsequent post-operative convalescent period cannot be determined.Should any additional relevant medical information be provided, this case would be re-assessed.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 intramedullary nail system revealed that early weight bearing substantially increases implant loading and increases the risk of breaking the device.Weight bearing on bones that have failed to heal or healed partially or improperly can cause stress and fatigue in metallic surgical implants with consequent breakage or failure of the implants.This has been identified in postoperative care.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.Verifying the device configuration according to the drawing print is within the steps of the final inspection.Additionally, according to the material specification, the quality and manufacture of standard grade titanium, aluminum and vanadium alloy 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.
|