|
It was reported that, after tka surgery had been performed on (b)(6) 2013, the patient experienced a breakage of the post of the gii ps insert sz 5-6 9mm.This adverse event was solved by revision surgery on (b)(6) 2024, in which the broken post was easily retrieved and the rest of the insert was removed without difficulty and it was replaced with a new ps insert size 5-6, 11mm.No other problems were found with the remaining im the case.Health status of the patient is unknown by the moment.
|
|
The associated device was returned and evaluated.The visual inspection revealed that the post fractured off.The piece was returned.The visual also reveals discoloration, scratches and gouges.The explant shows signs of significant wear and use.This inspection was conducted by naked eye.A lab analysis performed on the device revealed that the knee insert post fracture may have been due to repeated posterior contact of the femoral cam on the post combined with excessive posterior to anterior shear force during activity.However, this could not be isolated as the root cause for this particular failure mode.Some additional factors that could have contributed to the reported event include patient anatomy, abnormal loading of limb and/or traumatic injury.The clinical/medical investigation stated that, in the absence of the requested medical documentation, clinical factors which could have contributed to the reported adverse event could not be definitively determined.According to the report, the patient was revised 11 years post implantation due to a fractured gii ps insert sz 5-6 9mm and implanted with a new ps insert (size 5-6 11mm).The impact to the patient was the fractured post and the revision.Since no other problem were reported with the remaining implants or the patient, no further clinical/medical assessment is warranted at this time.A review of the production order did not reveal a manufacturing abnormality that could have caused or contributed to the reported incident.A review of complaint history revealed similar events for the listed device over the previous 12 months, however, no commonalities that would suggest a device deficiency were found nor an adverse trend.In addition, no similar events for the batch based on the historical data were found, this failure mode will be monitored for future complaints for any necessary corrective actions.A review of the instructions for use documents for knee systems revealed that the implant can break or become damaged as a result of strenuous activity or trauma.This has been identified as a warning and precaution.A review of the risk management file revealed this failure mode was previously identified.The anticipated risk level is still adequate.A historical review concluded that there are no prior actions related to this product and event.According to the inspection procedure, a comparison of part configuration to print must be performed within the steps of the final inspection.At this time, we have no evidence to conclude that the product failed to meet any specifications at the time of manufacture.Factors that could contribute to the reported event include abnormal loading of limb, excessive forces and/or traumatic injury.Based on this investigation, the need for corrective action is not indicated.Should additional information be received, the complaint will be reopened.No further investigation is warranted for this complaint; however, we will continue to monitor for future complaints and investigate as necessary.We consider this investigation closed.
|