|
EXACTECH, INC. OPTETRAK HI-FLEX TIBIAL INSERT SZ 3 13MM; PROSTHESIS, KNEE, PATELLOFEMOROTIBIAL, SEMI-CONSTRAINED, CEMENTED, POLYMER/METAL
|
Back to Search Results |
|
| Catalog Number |
244-23-13 |
| Medical Device Problem Code |
Naturally Worn (2988)
|
| Health Effect - Clinical Codes |
Failure of Implant (1924); Insufficient Information (4580)
|
| Date of Event |
04/12/2021
|
|
Type of Reportable Event
|
Serious Injury
|
|
Additional Manufacturer Narrative
|
|
Section h10: (h3) pending evaluation.(d10) concomitant device(s): (b)(6) 204-40-08 - stem extension 80l x20 mm.(b)(6) 200-02-29 - three peg patella 29mm.(b)(6) 208-07-03 - cc posterior fem augment sz 3, 5mm.(b)(6) 208-09-05 - cc stem ext adaptor 5 degree.(b)(6) 208-01-03 - cc femoral sz 3.
|
| |
|
Event or Problem Description
|
|
It was reported that this female patient was revised for a third time in (b)(6) 2021 (1st revision: case-(b)(4) / 1038671-2023-02731, 2nd revision: case-(b)(4) / 1038671-2023-02728).Polyethylene is observed with wear in the medial area and in the central pivot, with medial and posterolateral delamination.Revised to a competitor device.
|
| |
|
Additional Manufacturer Narrative
|
|
H3: the revision reported may have been the result of malalignment between the femoral and tibial components, third body wear, patient-related conditions, the device incompatibility documented above, instability, or any combination of these possibilities, which led to wear of the polyethylene insert.However, this cannot be confirmed because the component was not returned for evaluation and images or radiographs were not provided.Additionally, the insert was packaged in a non-conforming vacuum bag for over five years, which may have contributed to the reported wear.
|
| |
|
Additional Manufacturer Narrative
|
|
This follow-up report is being submitted to relay additional and/or corrected information.The revision reported may have been the result of malalignment between the femoral and tibial components, third body wear, patient-related conditions, the device incompatibility documented above, instability, or any combination of these possibilities, which led to wear of the polyethylene insert.However, this cannot be confirmed because the component was not returned for evaluation and images or radiographs were not provided.Additionally, the insert was packaged in a non-conforming vacuum bag for over five years, which may have contributed to the reported wear.If any further information is obtained that would change or alter any information provided, a supplemental report will be filed accordingly.
|
| |
|
Search Alerts/Recalls
|
|
|