|
MENTOR TEXAS MENTOR SMOOTH ROUND MODERATE PROFILE; PROSTHESIS, BREAST, INFLATABLE, INTERNAL, SALINE
|
Back to Search Results |
|
| Catalog Number |
3501630 |
| Medical Device Problem Code |
Material Rupture (1546)
|
| Health Effect - Clinical Codes |
Calcium Deposits/Calcification (1758); Deformity/ Disfigurement (2360)
|
| Date of Event |
06/10/2025
|
|
Type of Reportable Event
|
Serious Injury
|
|
Additional Manufacturer Narrative
|
|
Section d 6b.Explantation date: (b)(6) 2025.Since the device has not been returned for analysis, no product failure analysis can be conducted, and no determination of possible contributing factors can be made.As such, the investigation will be closed.If the complaint device is received in the future, the investigation will be reopened and conducted as appropriate.A manufacturing record evaluation (mre) was performed, and no anomalies were found related to this complaint.In addition, the mre verifies that the device was manufactured in accordance with documented specification and procedures.Reason for device explant and/or reoperation: material rupture.Mentor is submitting this report pursuant to the provisions of 21 cfr, part 803.This report may be based on information which mentor has not been able to investigate or verify prior to the required reporting date.This report does not reflect a conclusion by fda, mentor, or its employees that the report constitutes an admission that the device, mentor, or its employees caused or contributed to the potential event described in this report.Manufacturer¿s reference number: (b)(4).
|
| |
|
Event or Problem Description
|
|
It was reported that a patient underwent breast augmentation revision with two 225cc mentor smooth round moderate profile saline breast prostheses.Post-operatively, the patient was diagnosed, via mammogram, with left breast implant deflation.As a result, the patient has been scheduled for breast implant removal surgery on (b)(6) 2025.
|
| |
|
Additional Manufacturer Narrative
|
|
On october 2, 2025, the mentor failure analysis lab received the device for evaluation.The analysis has begun but is not complete at this time.When the investigational analysis has been completed, a supplemental report will be submitted.On october 10, 2025, mentor received additional information indicating that the patient was also diagnosed, via mammography, with scattered benign appearing calcifications.
|
| |
|
Additional Manufacturer Narrative
|
|
On october 28, 2025, the product investigation was completed.Device investigation summary: the product was returned to mentor for evaluation.Mentor conducted visual inspection and leak testing of the returned device.Visual analysis of the returned device revealed that no damage or anomalies were observed on the breast implant.Leak testing was performed, in accordance with mentor procedures, and no leak sites were detected during the analysis.The event described could not be confirmed as the breast implant was returned without detectable damage.Although no product defect was identified, there may have been other circumstances or issues that occurred during the use of the device that could not be replicated during the laboratory analysis.Calcification and breast imaging calcification of a biomaterial occurs when calcium salts are deposited in the tissue capsule surrounding the implanted device.Calcification occurs in association with a wide variety of implanted prostheses, including breast implants, heart valves, vascular grafts, and soft contact lenses, as well as in the mature breast tissue of women that have not undergone breast surgery.Calcification of the fibrous capsule that may occur following implantation of breast prostheses is generally not of clinical significance, although it may exacerbate symptoms of capsular contracture.Concern has been raised, however; that calcification may interfere with tumor detection, because microcalcifications are considered a halfmark of malignant breast disease.Although clinicians have recommended pre- and post-surgical mammograms for augmentation patients to assist in distinguishing post-operative findings from calcification associated with malignancy, benign calcification resulting from surgery is generally considered distinguishable from malignant-type calcification.Further, no published reports were identified that document any actual occurrences of missed or delayed diagnoses attributable to capsular calcification.Calcification is not a phenomenon unique to breast implants.It occurs in 11 to 53 percent of women who underwent breast reduction procedures (abboud et aj.1995, m&nick et al.1990, brown et al.1987).In the breasts of women who have not undergone any breast surgery, the prevalence of benign calcifications increases progressively with age from 8 percent in women 25 to 29 years old up to 86 percent in women 75 to 79 years old (stomper et al.1996).The contralateral device was also received (lot number 5660760).The patient did not report any issue with this device.Therefore, no further analysis of the contralateral device is required.As part of mentor's quality process, all devices are manufactured, inspected, and released according to approved specifications.Based on the results of this investigation, it was determined that the product met the manufacturing release criteria: since no malfunction was observed during the investigation.No corrective and preventive action (capa) is required now.
|
| |
|
Search Alerts/Recalls
|
|
|