|
Allegedly, patient underwent thr on (b)(6) 2015 left hip revised on (b)(6) 2019 due multiple hip dislocation.The femoral stem originally used was a profemur z classic size 5 short straight neck and femoral head was a biolox delta 28mm s, double mobility polyethylene liner was used.Only the femoral head and liner were revised there is no further data on what devices were implanted after revision surgery.
|
|
The alleged complaint could not be confirmed.Review of the complaint does not reveal any failure involving this implant.These implants were not returned for investigation, nor were any pictures provided to assist with the investigation.These implants were implanted for approximately 43 months before being revised due to hip dislocation.In the revision surgery, pha04402 and dlxpxb28 were revised while pha0cls5 were not.It is unknown when this implant was manufactured or if it was manufactured to specification due to the unknown lot number.There are no trends for this implant and failure.It cannot be concluded what the level of contribution, if any, that the product had to the complaint.No further evaluations can be made without return of the product or receipt of additional clinical information.The mpo hip systems package insert (150803-9) lists dislocation, migration and/or subluxation of prosthetic components from improper positioning, trauma, loss of fixation and/or muscle and fibrous tissue laxity? as a potential adverse effect of total hip arthroplasty.Additionally, it also states periodic, long-term follow-up is recommended to monitor the position and state of the prosthetic components, as well as the condition of the adjoining bone.Periodic post-operative x-rays are recommended for close comparison with early post-op conditions to detect long term evidence of changes in position, loosening, bending, or cracking of components.Mpo will continue to monitor this issue through complaint tracking.
|