| Catalog Number |
02-012-45-3535 |
| Medical Device Problem Codes |
Adverse Event Without Identified Device or Use Problem (2993); Insufficient Device Problem Information (3190)
|
| Health Effect - Clinical Code |
Bone Fracture(s) (1870)
|
| Date of Event |
12/13/2022
|
|
Type of Reportable Event
|
Serious Injury
|
|
Event or Problem Description
|
|
As reported via legal documentation the 69 y/o male patient had a left knee replacement on (b)(6) 2014.Approximately 8 years and 9 months after the initial procedure the patient had a left knee revision on (b)(6) 2022.The tibial component was removed, and the remaining cement was then removed from the cut surface of the tibia utilizing a saw, osteotomes and a rongeur.During removal of the tibial component, the posterior condyle of the tibia was fractured in a partial articular pattern but remained stable due to soft tissue attachments.Cement was then removed from the intramedullary canal of the tibia utilizing burr, osteotomes, reverse curettes and pituitary instruments.The fracture was provisionally held with k wires and two lag screws were placed with cancellous 4.0 screws medially and laterally to avoid the tibial component keel and stem.Once the screws were placed, the trial tibia was placed to ensure no obstructions due to the screws.The fracture was stable with this fixation and other fixation options were felt to not be worthwhile given the fracture extent.Fluoroscopy confirmed acceptable fracture alignment and hardware positioning.¿ there is no other patient demographic or medical history available.There is no device return.There are no photos or other images of the device provided.No additional information is available.
|
| |
|
Additional Manufacturer Narrative
|
|
Pending investigation.D10.Concomitants: (b)(6): 02-012-35-3509 - logic tibia ps mod insrt sz 3.5 9mm.(b)(6): 02-010-01-0235 - logic femoral ps cem left sz 3.5.(b)(6): 200-02-35 - three peg patella 35mm.(b)(6): 201-78-99 - 2pk, schanz pin 4mmx130mmx40mm thrd.
|
| |
|
Additional Manufacturer Narrative
|
|
Investigation results-the patient experienced a bone fracture during device removal, there is no indication that the device malfunctioned or caused the bone fracture; "during removal of the tibial component, the posterior condyle of the tibia was fractured in a partial articular pattern but remained stable due to soft tissue attachments." it is most likely that the method of device removal contributed to the bone fracture.It is noted in the ifu that: bone quality must be considered to ensure that the prostheses does not subside or migrate; fracture of host bone should also be considered.These devices are used for treatment not diagnosis.There is no additional information available.
|
| |
|
Search Alerts/Recalls
|