| Model Number |
PDL-M-IP08S |
| Medical Device Problem Code |
Malposition of Device (2616)
|
| Health Effect - Clinical Code |
Limb Pain (4836)
|
| Date of Event |
05/17/2025
|
|
Type of Reportable Event
|
Serious Injury
|
|
Additional Manufacturer Narrative
|
|
An mdr is indicated for this complaint.It was reported that a patient was implant with a pdl device at l5-s1 on (b)(6) 2025.Following surgery, the patient had developed leg pain that was not present prior to surgery.Imaging showed that the implant was too far posterior.The surgeon revised the implant on (b)(6) 2025 by removing the inlay, repositioning the endplates and inserting a new inlay.The dhr reviews found no anomalies associated with the complaint.Complaint trending found that the rate of complaints is within the level outlined in the risk documentation.A review of the risk documentation found that the hazards associated with this complaint are identified and mitigated to a level where the clinical benefits outweigh the harms.The prodisc l implant was not returned as the plates were repositioned in the patient and the poly inlay was discarded, therefore no device evaluation could be completed.Imaging was provided that showed the implant was too far from posterior.The prodisc l revision surgery was completed because the patient had new leg pain following surgery which was cause by the implant being placed too far posterior.The submission is 3 of 3 devices involved in this event.
|
| |
|
Event or Problem Description
|
|
A patient was implant with a pdl device at l5-s1 on (b)(6) 2025.Following surgery, the patient had developed leg pain that was not present prior to surgery.Imaging showed that the implant was too far from posterior.The surgeon revised the implant on (b)(6) 2025 by removing the inlay, repositioning the endplates and inserting a new inlay.
|
| |
|
Search Alerts/Recalls
|