|
It was reported that, after a left bhr performed on (b)(6) 2009, a revision surgery was performed on (b)(6) 2019.During the revision surgery the posterior soft tissues were inspected and it was found a rather large cavity, representing either a hemosiderin sustained previous seroma, or an adverse local tissue reaction to metal.There was not a typical pseudotumor.Synovitis was present, suggesting an adverse reaction to trace metal particles.The implants were removed and replaced, converting it in a thr.The current health status of the patient is unknown.
|
|
H3, h6: it was reported that a left hip revision surgery was performed due to adverse local tissue reaction to metal and synovitis.As of today, the devices, all of which were used in treatment, remain implanted and therefore cannot be tested.A review of the historical complaints data for the alleged devices 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 cup and the head, and this failure will continue to be monitored.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, no prior applicable escalation actions were identified.The available medical documents were reviewed.Seroma is a known complication of surgery, and it cannot be concluded the possible hemosiderin stained seroma is associated with a mal performance of the implant or implant failure.With the information provide the clinical root cause of the possible adverse local tissue reaction to metal cannot be confirmed.The patient impact beyond the reported clinical reactions and 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.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.
|