|
A review of the device history records confirmed that the device was manufactured and tested according to relevant procedures and shipped according to manufacturer's specifications.On 30-dec-2024, apifix was made aware that patient #(b)(6), who had an apifix inserted from t10-l4 in (b)(6) 2021, presented with increasing low back pain, particularly during work-related activities like lifting and mopping.Upon examination, it was discovered that the rod is fractured.The fracture was present at her last consultation in (b)(6) 2024 but was not identified at that time.Patient has been skeletally mature for over three years and also has an intertransverse process fusion from l2-l4, noted since at least (b)(6) 2023.The connection between the rod fracture and her pain is not definitive.There has been some resistance from the family regarding the removal of the implant.The next appointment is scheduled for (b)(6) 2025.There is no plan for reoperation at this time.Once additional relevant details become available; a supplemental report will be submitted.
|
|
On 30-dec-2024 apifix was made aware that patient #(b)(6) that had an apifix inserted from t10-l4 in august of 2021 and has been skeletally mature for over 3 years, presented with increasing low back pain, particularly during work-related activities like lifting and mopping.Doctor noticed that the rod is fractured.It was already fractured when he saw her in (b)(6), but he didn't notice it.The connection between the rod fracture and her pain is not definitive.
|