|
EXACTECH, INC. 145-DEG PE 42MM HUM LINER +2.5; PROSTHESIS, SHOULDER, NON-CONSTRAINED, METAL/POLYMER CEMENTED
|
Back to Search Results |
|
| Catalog Number |
320-42-03 |
| Medical Device Problem Codes |
Detachment of Device or Device Component (2907); Migration (4003)
|
| Health Effect - Clinical Codes |
Muscle/Tendon Damage (4532); Aseptic loosening (4883)
|
| Date of Event |
07/05/2022
|
|
Type of Reportable Event
|
Serious Injury
|
|
Event or Problem Description
|
|
It was reported that the patient underwent an initial reverse total shoulder replacement on the right side.Subsequently, the patient experienced mechanical loosening of other internal prosthetic joint.As a result, approximately 2 years after initial replacement, the patient underwent a right shoulder revision.No further impact to the patient was reported.No other information is available.
|
| |
|
Additional Manufacturer Narrative
|
|
(d10) concomitant devices: 300-01-11 - eq, humeral stem primary, press fit 11mm: 6651170.320-10-00 - equinoxe reverse adapter plate tray +0: 6641566.320-02-42 - rs exp glenosphere 42mm, +4mm: offset 6574449.320-15-01 - equinoxe reverse glenoid plate: 6594673.320-15-05 - equinoxe reverse locking screw: 6628437.320-15-05 - equinoxe reverse locking screw: 6652623.The device will not be returned for analysis; however, an investigation of the reported event is in progress.Once the investigation is completed, a supplemental medwatch 3500a will be submitted.If any further information is obtained that would change or alter any information provided, a supplemental report will be filed accordingly.
|
| |
|
Additional Manufacturer Narrative
|
|
This follow-up report is being submitted to relay additional and/or corrected information.The following sections were updated/corrected: d1.The revision was likely the result of disassembly between the humeral liner and humeral tray and subsequent migration of the humeral liner.The reported wear of the adapter tray and glenosphere was likely due to the migration of the liner and subsequent metal-on-metal articulation between the tray and glenosphere.The migration of the liner may have been the result of disassociation from the tray and internal forces in vivo.However, this cannot be confirmed and potential contributions from patient conditions, an unreported traumatic event, incomplete seating of the humeral liner during implantation, forceful contact between the liner and glenoid bone (scapular notching), or a combination of the above to the reported disassembly of the humeral liner cannot be determined as the devices were not returned for evaluation and images/radiographs were not provided.If any further information is obtained that would change or alter any information provided, a supplemental report will be filed accordingly.
|
| |
|
Additional Manufacturer Narrative
|
|
This follow-up report is being submitted to relay additional and/or corrected information.The following sections were updated/corrected: g4, h6.Mdr section codes updated/corrected: a, b, c, d, e, g.The revision reported was likely the result of disassembly between the humeral liner and humeral tray and subsequent migration of the humeral liner.The reported wear of the adapter tray and glenosphere was likely due to the migration of the liner and subsequent metal-on-metal articulation between the tray and glenosphere.The migration of the liner may have been the result of disassociation from the tray and internal forces in vivo.However, this cannot be confirmed and potential contributions from patient conditions, an unreported traumatic event, incomplete seating of the humeral liner during implantation, forceful contact between the liner and glenoid bone (scapular notching), or a combination of the above to the reported disassembly of the humeral liner cannot be determined as the devices were not returned for evaluation and images/radiographs were not provided.Should additional relevant information be obtained, a follow-up mdr will be submitted accordingly.
|
| |
|
Search Alerts/Recalls
|
|
|