|
EXACTECH, INC. LOGIC TIB INSERT IMPL CRC, SZ 2, 13MM; PROSTHESIS, KNEE, PATELLOFEMOROTIBIAL, SEMI-CONSTRAINED, CEMENTED, POLYMER/METAL
|
Back to Search Results |
|
| Catalog Number |
02-012-51-2013 |
| Medical Device Problem Codes |
Unstable (1667); Naturally Worn (2988)
|
| Health Effect - Clinical Codes |
Pain (1994); Scar Tissue (2060); Ambulation or Postural Difficulties (2544); Joint Laxity (4526); Swelling/ Edema (4577)
|
| Date of Event |
02/06/2024
|
|
Type of Reportable Event
|
Serious Injury
|
|
Event or Problem Description
|
|
It was reported via a legal short form and other sources, that a 62 yo female patient, who had an initial right knee implanted with recalled poly on (b)(6) 2019, underwent a revision procedure on (b)(6) 2024, approximately 4 years 3 months post the initial procedure.The patient returned to the surgeon¿s office with complaints of pain, swelling, instability, and dissatisfaction with their right tka.The short form indicated the patient suffered immense pain, loss of consortium, and loss of mobility.Upon examination, the patient was scheduled to have a revision tka possible poly swap vs full revision.Pre-operative diagnosis failed right total knee arthroplasty due to instability.Post-operative diagnosis failed right total knee arthroplasty due to instability, probably right disease, and femoral component debonding.Once the surgeon entered the joint, there were a significant amount of synovial tissue consistent with poly wear disease.Significant poly wear on the weight bearing portion of the lateral condyle.The femoral component was debonded from the underlying bone, and the tibial component was in significant varus malalignment.The patient underwent a full knee revision to a competitor¿s revision knee implants.No knee implants or equipment was brought to the case from the company who provided the initial implants.Only tibial poly implants and patellas were provided.It was noted that the femoral component was loose and was removed from the femoral bone.The tibia implant was fixed though, but without revision metal femoral options at the procedure, the tibial component had to be removed for the competitor¿s knee revision to be implanted.A complete knee revision occurred using a competitor¿s knee revision system.There were no device breakages during the procedure.There was a 15-to-30-minute surgical delay because the full revision took longer than the intended poly swap.There were no adverse events to the patient as a result.The patient was last known to be in stable condition following the event.No x-rays were provided.No explanted devices are available for analysis.They were discarded by the facility.Device images were provided.No further information.
|
| |
|
Additional Manufacturer Narrative
|
|
D10: concomitants: 3625737 - 02-012-51-2013 - logic tib insert impl crc, sz 2, 13mm.4822337 - 02-012-45-2020 - lgc tibial fit tray cem sz 2f / 2t.4920866 - 200-05-26 - inset patella 26mm.Should additional relevant information be obtained, a follow-up mdr will be submitted accordingly.
|
| |
|
Additional Manufacturer Narrative
|
|
This follow-up report is being submitted to relay additional and/or corrected information.The reason for the revision reported was likely due to prosthesis wear, instability, and an insufficient bond between the femoral component and the bone, which led to aseptic (non-infected) femoral loosening.Possible causes for polyethylene wear include malalignment between the implants, inclusion of the polyethylene in the recall, high contact stresses during knee flexion/extension, third body wear, patient-related conditions, instability, or any combination of these possibilities.The instability may have been caused by implant malalignment; however, this cannot be confirmed.If any further information is obtained that would change or alter any information provided, a supplemental report will be filed accordingly.
|
| |
|
Search Alerts/Recalls
|
|
|