|
EXACTECH, INC. NV GXL LINER LIPPED 36MM ID GROUP 2; PROSTHESIS, HIP, SEMI-CONSTRAINED, METAL/CERAMIC/POLYMER, CEMENTED OR NON-POROUS
|
Back to Search Results |
|
| Catalog Number |
132-36-52 |
| Medical Device Problem Code |
Naturally Worn (2988)
|
| Health Effect - Clinical Codes |
Failure of Implant (1924); Osteolysis (2377); Implant Pain (4561)
|
| Date of Event |
08/18/2023
|
|
Type of Reportable Event
|
Serious Injury
|
|
Additional Manufacturer Narrative
|
|
H10.D10.Concomitants - product information: 2979385 164-12-12 - novation element ro x/o sz 12; 5204341 170-36-00 - biolox delta femoral head 36mm od, +0mm; 5371822 186-01-52 - integrip cc, cluster 52mm, g2.Pending investigation.There is no other information available.
|
| |
|
Event or Problem Description
|
|
It was reported via legal documentation that a patient had a left hip implant on (b)(6) 2018, and then experienced a revision surgical procedure on (b)(6) 2023, approximately 5 years, 2 months after initial implant.Revision operative report of (b)(6) 2023- postoperative diagnosis: left hip replacement polyethylene wear and osteolysis.There was evidence of reaction in the soft tissue consistent with response to osteolysis.The patient was taken to the recovery room in stable condition.The devices were not returned, there are no images provided.There is no other information available.
|
| |
|
Additional Manufacturer Narrative
|
|
B1: corrected.B2: corrected.H6: corrected the following: health effect - clinical code, component code, type of investigation, investigation findings, investigation conclusions.Manufacturer narrative: based on the available information, the patient involved in the incident meets the following risk criteria for early prosthesis wear and/or osteolysis: combination of largest available femoral head and/or thinnest available acetabular liner was used and implanted with a component having a shelf age of greater than 2 years.The most likely cause for the reported revision due to prosthesis wear and osteolysis is a combination of the risk factors such as use error, implant positioning, implant size selection, and patient factors (fitness for surgery, biomechanics, activity level and local tissue oxidation potential).However, this cannot be confirmed as the devices were not returned for evaluation, and images and radiographs were not provided.
|
| |
|
Search Alerts/Recalls
|
|
|