|
The reported event could be confirmed, since the device was not returned for evaluation and but with available radiograph alleged event can be confirmed.The device inspection was not possible as the product was not returned for investigation.A review of the device history for the reported lot did not indicate any abnormalities.No corrective actions are required at this time.A review of the labeling did not indicate any abnormalities.No indications of material, manufacturing or design related problems were found during the investigation.Based on available ct scans a formal medical opinion was sought the ct scan shows significant cysts and also a clear subsidence/migration of the tibial component posteriorly.There is some radiolucence adjacent to the talar component, but no clear subsidence or loosening can be seen, here.There is no obvious reason for the loosening, therefore poor bone substance and thus a patient related cause is likely.Failure of total ankle replacement tar over time is a known complication.In case of a planned revision procedure a medical opinion aiming to determine the root cause of the failure is part of the internal investigation process.Sufficient radiological and clinical information must be provided to enable a meaningful clinical assessment and to identify possible causes of failure.In cases where a ct scan is the only available clinical source, this assessment is limited.No conclusive statement can be provided, because key clinical information e.G.Clinical status, exact symptoms and range of motion of the patient, assessment of the treating physician is missing.The root causes of radiographic findings such as radiolucent areas and bone cysts are often complex and multifactorial and cannot be determined scientifically without this decisive evidence.Based on the formal opinion from the available ct scans, the root cause is most likely patient related due to poor bone substance.If device is returned or any further information is provided, the investigation report will be reassessed.
|