|
EXACTECH, INC. THREE PEG PATELLA 35MM; PROSTHESIS, KNEE, PATELLOFEMOROTIBIAL, SEMI-CONSTRAINED, CEMENTED, POLYMER/METAL
|
Back to Search Results |
|
| Catalog Number |
200-02-35 |
| Medical Device Problem Code |
Naturally Worn (2988)
|
| Health Effect - Clinical Codes |
Pain (1994); Synovitis (2094); Discomfort (2330); Joint Laxity (4526); Swelling/ Edema (4577); Appropriate Clinical Signs, Symptoms and Conditions Term/Code Not Available (4581)
|
| Date of Event |
03/06/2023
|
|
Type of Reportable Event
|
Serious Injury
|
|
Additional Manufacturer Narrative
|
|
D10: concomitants: (b)(6), 02-010-03-0235 - logic cr femoral cem, left, sz 3.5, (b)(6), 02-012-45-3545 - lgc tibial fit tray cem sz 3.5f / 4.5t, (b)(6), 02-012-48-3513 - logic cr tib insert slope +, sz 3.5, 13 mm.H3 - the revision reported was likely the result of insert and patellar prosthesis wear.The potential root causes of the alleged joint instability, or potential loosening/malalignment of the femoral and/or tibial component cannot be confirmed from the provided information.Additional reasons for the reported revision may be inclusion of the polyethylene in the packaging recall.Additionally, a contributing factor to the reported wear may have been the result of being packaged in a non-conforming vacuum bag for more than five years.Potential contributions of user and patient-related considerations to the event could not be assessed as the devices were not available for evaluation and were not provided.Should additional relevant information be obtained, a follow-up mdr will be submitted accordingly.
|
| |
|
Event or Problem Description
|
|
It was reported that a 71 yo male patient, who had an initial left total knee implanted, underwent a revision procedure, approximately 5 years 5 months post the initial procedure.The patient presented with complaints on their left primary knee including pain and dissatisfaction.It was determined the implanted poly was part of the recall.The patient underwent a poly swap and patella swap.The patient was revised to a size 13mm crc poly for sz 3.5 and a 35mm round 3 peg cemented patella.There were no surgical delays reported.The patient was last known to be in stable condition following the event.The device was returned for analysis.The patient has filed a short-form complaint in a coordinated action in alachua county with master case no.(b)(4).The consolidated long form complaint that applies to cases filed in this coordinated action alleges that patients filing suits in this coordinated action were required ¿to undergo revision surgeries due to severe, pain, swelling, and instability¿ due to ¿wear of the polyethylene components and resulting component loosening and/or other failure failures causing serious complications including tissue damage, osteolysis, permanent bone loss, and other injuries.¿ because the patient has filed a short-form complaint in this coordinated action, the patient appears to allege that the patient was injured as a result.
|
| |
|
Additional Manufacturer Narrative
|
|
This follow-up report is being submitted to relay additional and/or corrected information.The following sections were updated/corrected: d1, h6.Mdr section codes updated/corrected: c, d.The revision reported was likely the result of tibial insert prosthesis wear, the reported instability, or inclusion of the polyethylene in the packaging recall.Possible causes for polyethylene wear include malalignment between the implants, high contact stresses during knee flexion, patient-related conditions, instability, inclusion of the polyethylene in the packaging recall that was packaged for longer than 5 years, or any combination of these possibilities.If any further information is obtained that would change or alter any information provided, a supplemental report will be filed accordingly.
|
| |
|
Search Alerts/Recalls
|
|
|