|
|
| Catalog Number |
136-32-52 |
| Medical Device Problem Codes |
Naturally Worn (2988); Insufficient Device Problem Information (3190)
|
| Health Effect - Clinical Codes |
Cyst(s) (1800); Osteolysis (2377); Insufficient Information (4580)
|
| Date of Event |
07/13/2025
|
|
Type of Reportable Event
|
Serious Injury
|
|
Additional Manufacturer Narrative
|
|
The reason for the revision reported cannot be confirmed from the information provided but may be due to inclusion of the polyethylene in the packaging recall, wear, osteolysis, loosening, infection, fracture, instability/dislocation, leg length discrepancy, and/or patient related factors.Potential contributions of user and patient-related considerations to the event could not be assessed as the devices were not available for evaluation and images, radiographs, and relevant clinical information 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 patient who had a hip implanted, underwent a revision procedure.Reason unknown.The liner was revised.No further information.
|
| |
|
Additional Manufacturer Narrative
|
|
This follow-up report is being submitted to relay additional information.The following sections were updated: h3, h6 the reported event was unable to be confirmed due to limited information received from the customer.No device was returned for evaluation; further, photographs and/or radiograph images were not provided for review.Operative notes and/or medical records were not provided for review of usage/ technique.A review of complaint history determined that no further action is required as no trends were identified.The reason for the revision reported cannot be confirmed from the information provided but may be due to inclusion of the polyethylene in the packaging recall, wear, osteolysis, loosening, infection, fracture, instability/dislocation, leg length discrepancy, and/or patient related factors.Potential contributions of user and patient-related considerations to the event could not be assessed as the devices were not available for evaluation and images, radiographs, and relevant clinical information were not provided.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 information.The following sections were updated: a3, b5, d4, d6a, d6b.D10: 180-01-52 - crown cup, cluster-hole gr.52: sn #(b)(6).H4, h6, h11.Should additional relevant information be obtained, a follow-up mdr will be submitted accordingly.
|
| |
|
Event or Problem Description
|
|
Due to recurrent symptoms, the patient presented for a follow-up examination.X-ray and ct scans revealed significant decentering of the prosthetic head and unusually large osteolytic lesions in the acetabulum, indicative of inlay wear.This was confirmed during an inlay replacement procedure, using a specially approved vitamin e-hardened inlay.The procedure involved verification of the components.During the revision surgery, in addition to replacing the inlay, the integrity of the acetabular cup was confirmed, the cysts in the acetabular socket were curetted and filled with hydroxylapatite + calcium (cerement bone void filler), and the prosthetic head was replaced.No further information.This is 1 of 2 events for this patient.
|
| |
|
Additional Manufacturer Narrative
|
|
This follow-up report is being submitted to relay additional information.The following sections were updated: h3, h6, h11.The reported event was unable to be confirmed due to limited information received from the customer.No device was returned for evaluation; further, photographs and/or radiograph images were not provided for review.A review of complaint history determined that no further action is required as no trends were identified.Based on the available information, the patient involved meets the following risk criteria for early prosthesis wear/osteolysis as specified: implanted with a lateralized liner and implanted with a component having a shelf age of greater than 2 years.The most likely cause for the revision reported due to prosthesis wear and osteolysis is a combination of the risk factors specified.However, this cannot be confirmed because the devices were not available for evaluation, and no images or radiographs were provided.Should additional relevant information be obtained, a follow-up mdr will be submitted accordingly.
|
| |
|
Search Alerts/Recalls
|
|
|