|
SMITH & NEPHEW, INC. GII PS HI FLEX ISRT SZ 5-6 9MM; PROSTHESIS, KNEE, PATELLOFEMOROTIBIAL, SEMI-CONSTRAINED, CEMENTED, POLYMER/METAL
|
Back to Search Results |
|
| Catalog Number |
71421515 |
| Medical Device Problem Code |
Positioning Failure (1158)
|
| Health Effect - Clinical Code |
No Clinical Signs, Symptoms or Conditions (4582)
|
| Date of Event |
01/13/2025
|
|
Type of Reportable Event
|
Malfunction
|
|
Additional Manufacturer Narrative
|
|
Internal complaint reference: (b)(4).This complaint was opened by smith+nephew to document a product problem associated with a smith+nephew device.The reported problem relates to known inherent device and/or procedural risks that are appropriately documented in our risk files.Smith+nephew will continue to monitor trends in accordance with our post-market surveillance process and take necessary action as required if anticipated severity and/or occurrence rates are exceeded.Smith+nephew has no reason to suspect that the product failed to meet any specifications at the time of manufacture.Based on our review of all currently available information, we are unable to identify a definitive root cause.However, as the use of our product cannot be excluded as a potential cause or contributory factor to the reported issue, we are conservatively submitting this report in accordance with applicable regulations.If additional investigative findings or information becomes available that alters the conclusions of this report, a follow-up report will be submitted as required.
|
| |
|
Event or Problem Description
|
|
It was reported that, during a tka surgery, shim inserter struck the gii ps hi flex isrt sz 5-6 9mm repeatedly and failed to implant, the prosthesis trench could not trap the insert.Finally, the gii ps hi flex isrt sz 5-6 9mm was replaced for a same type insert.The procedure was completed, after a delay greater than 30 minutes.Patient was not harmed as consequence of this problem.
|
| |
|
Additional Manufacturer Narrative
|
|
H3, h6: the device was not returned for evaluation; therefore, a device analysis could not be performed.The clinical/medical investigation couldn't determine the cause of the problem.The intraoperative photo shows the insert and inserter, but it does not provide any clues about the cause.No further clinical assessment is needed 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 part number over the previous 12 months, but no similar events for the batch based on the historical data, this failure mode will be monitored for future complaints for any necessary corrective actions.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.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 surgical technique used, size selected or user/procedural variance.Based on this investigation, the need for corrective action is not indicated.Should the device or 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.Corrected data: h8.
|
| |
|
Additional Manufacturer Narrative
|
|
Additional information: d9, h3, h6 (type of investigation and investigation findings), h11 (roi).H3, h6: the associated device was returned and evaluated.A visual inspection of the returned device concluded the device presents with minimal scuffing on the inferior surface of the implant.The complaint description alleges product did not seat or mate after repeat attempts in surgery.Plastic is easily distorted when attempting to implant, especially when the mating surface that is rigid and harder than the plastic.Surface finish damage and critical feature distortion are sufficient to alter the measurement(s) during evaluation.For this reason, no dimensional analysis will be conducted.However, based on the information provided, the unsatisfactory experience could be confirmed.The clinical/medical investigation couldn't determine the cause of the problem.The intraoperative photo shows the insert and inserter, but it does not provide any clues about the cause.No further clinical assessment is needed 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 part number over the previous 12 months, but no similar events for the batch based on the historical data, this failure mode will be monitored for future complaints for any necessary corrective actions.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.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 size selected or insertion technique.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.
|
| |
|
Search Alerts/Recalls
|
|
|