|
Additional information: d9, g3, h3, h6.Complaint allegation is confirmed.-upon visual inspection, and x-ray review provided noted that the locking distal fibula plate, ss, right, 5 hole, was broken off.The holes were chipped around the threads.The single-use device was used/removed and returned for investigation due to the development of pseudarthrosis at the fracture site.-dimensional inspection was conducted in accordance with drawing c18665-21, and all measured values were found to be within specified tolerances.(refer to dimension results for details.) -functional testing was not performed due to the damage to the device.Per dfu-0192-eo c.Contraindications-1.Insufficient quantity or quality of bone.2.Blood supply limitations and previous infections, which may retard healing.5.Conditions that tend to limit the patient's ability or willingness to restrict activities or follow directions during the healing period.E.Warnings-5.Postoperatively and until healing is complete, fixation provided by this device should be considered as temporary and may not withstand weight bearing or other unsupported stress.The fixation provided by this device should be protected.The postoperative regimen prescribed by the physician should be strictly followed to avoid adverse stresses applied to the device.7.Any decision to remove the device should take into consideration the potential risk to the patient of a second surgical procedure.Device removal should be followed by adequate postoperative management.8.Detailed instructions on the use and limitations of this device should be given to the patient.G.Precautions- 4.Repeated bending of the plate at the same location, or by creating excessive acute angles may potentially lead to premature plate fatigue, failure and or breakage in situ.The most likely cause of the reported failure is patient specific effect, which involves the development of pseudarthrosis at the fracture site, which likely contributed to prolonged instability and delayed healing.This condition may have increased mechanical stress on the implant, ultimately leading to hardware fatigue and breakage, due to repeated bending of the plate at the same location, or by creating excessive acute angles that potentially lead to premature plate fatigue, failure, and or breakage in situ, and resulting in adverse patient outcomes for revision surgery.
|