|
The production lot consisted of (b)(4) devices, and according to the device lot history record, all devices released for distribution met the final inspection specifications and sterilization requirements.The identified non-conformances were determined not to have contributed to the occurrence in question.
|
|
The patient reported a complete loss of sensation on the left side of their hand three weeks following a prc surgery, which occurred prior to the implantation of the axoguard ha+.Upon further examination, the patient was diagnosed with median nerve entrapment associated with carpal tunnel syndrome.The axoguard ha+ was subsequently implanted during a carpal tunnel surgery approximately 2.5 months ago, with the specific date recorded as (b)(6) 2025.After the carpal tunnel and axoguard ha+ implantation procedure, the surgical wound experienced challenges in healing effectively for a period of about three weeks.Ultimately, the device was explanted during a revision surgery at an unspecified date thereafter.The revision surgery likely involved the removal of part or all of the axoguard ha+ implant.During this procedure, the surgeon utilized a tourniquet on the affected arm and re-closed the wound.Since the revision, the patient has reported ongoing and progressively worsening numbness in the hand, which has resulted in muscle atrophy and significant scarring around the surgical site.The patient has indicated that, despite local wound care support and the use of steri-strips, the wound took nearly a month to close following the revision.Based on information provided by the surgeon, as well as thorough due diligence and lot analysis, it is noted that the patient had undergone various treatments prior to the axoguard ha+ application, and had previously experienced issues.The patient also attempted self-wound care in earlier surgeries, as well as following the revision surgery.Importantly, lot analysis results indicated that the device was manufactured in accordance with specifications, and there have been no other complaints associated with this particular lot.Collectively, this evidence suggests that the observed outcomes are unlikely to be related to the axoguard ha+ nerve protector, and there have been no indications of allergic reactions or foreign body responses to the porcine material used.At this time, the surgeon has expressed uncertainty regarding the management of the patient's condition and has recommended a consultation with a neurologist for further evaluation.
|