|
It was reported that, after a left bhr tka surgery performed on (b)(6) 2012, the plaintiff presented elevated levels of metal ions.On (b)(6) 2023 he underwent under a medically indicated revision surgery of the left hip and converted into dual mobility hip.No signs of infection, implant loosening or osteolysis were noticed in the patient during the surgery.A cyst was noted in the anterior superior acetabulum, which did show some early metallosis.The surgeon decided to explant the previous bhr implants and replace the with dual mobility competitor implants.The patient current health status is unknown.
|
|
H3, h6: it was reported that a left hip revision surgery was performed due to elevated levels of metal ions.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, but not for the sleeve.This failure will continue to be monitored for the cup, and will continue to be monitored via routine trending for the head and the sleeve, however it should be noted that these last 2 devices are no longer sold.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, prior applicable escalation actions were identified and confirmed to reduce associated risks as far as possible.No further escalation actions are required.The available medical documents were reviewed.The surgical technique (bhr 10/10 rev a 4567-0103) indicates: the sequential reaming with hemispherical acetabular reamers is then performed and in normal consistency bone, reaming proceeds to 2mm less than the definitive acetabular component to be inserted.The line-to-line reaming, superior rim erosions and ¿medialized¿ implantation of the acetabular component cannot be ruled out as possible contributing factors to reported elevated metal ions, cyst, and early metallosis.It cannot be concluded the reported events were associated with a mal performance of the implant.The patient impact beyond the 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.
|