|
The alleged complaint could not be confirmed.From correspondence with an mpo employee who communicated with a surgeon involved with this event, the patient was stated to have been experiencing pain.The pain is possibly believed to be associated with an adverse reaction to the cocr modular neck as it was reported that bone and tissue were removed that indicated an adverse reaction.The revised products have not been returned to mpo for investigation.Additionally, mpo has not received any radiographs, images of the explanted devices, operative notes, or other support clinical documentation to confirm the alleged complaint.The provided information does note that the patient is tall and has a bmi of 40.Review of the device history record (dhr) for the subject manufacturing lot indicates that this part was manufactured to specification.Furthermore, mpo has not received any other complaint reports for the subject manufacturing lots.The potential for adverse reaction to a cocr modular neck is an issue addressed by corrective and preventive action (capa).This capa found that, "the potential for a patient reaction when implanted with a profemur® cocr modular neck is a known risk for this product technology.A combination of patient and surgical factors can contribute to an elevated risk of an adverse patient reaction.These factors include, but are not limited to, patient sensitivity, surgical technique, patient weight and activity level." additionally, the microport hip systems package insert lists "allergic reactions to materials; metal sensitivity; or reactions to wear debris that may lead to histological reactions, pseudotumor and aseptic lymphocytic vasculitis-associated lesions (alval)" as possible adverse effects associated with total hip arthroplasty.No conclusions regarding potential product contribution to the alleged complications can be determined from the available information.There were not any trends identified for this device and complaint type at the time of this complaint.Mpo will continue to monitor this complaint through complaint tracking.Updated investigation after new information received: wm 3/17/2026 the alleged complaint could not be confirmed.This investigation is being updated after receiving a legal file associated with this incident.The previous investigation was completed using information reported by an mpo employee who received information from a surgeon.Review of the provided legal file alleges that a revision operation was required due to corrosion at the neck-stem junction of the construct.The revision operation took place approximately 104 months after the index operation.Regarding the details outlined in the newly received file, the investigation findings from the initial investigation remain valid as follows: "the revised products have not been returned to mpo for investigation.Additionally, mpo has not received any radiographs, images of the explanted devices, operative notes, or other supporting clinical documentation to confirm the alleged complaint.The provided information does note that the patient is tall and has a bmi of 40.Review of the device history record (dhr) for the subject manufacturing lot indicates that this part was manufactured to specification.Furthermore, mpo has not received any other complaint reports for the subject manufacturing lots.The potential for adverse reaction to a cocr modular neck is an issue addressed by corrective and preventive action (capa).This capa found that, 'the potential for a patient reaction when implanted with a profemur® cocr modular neck is a known risk for this product technology.A combination of patient and surgical factors can contribute to an elevated risk of an adverse patient reaction.These factors include, but are not limited to, patient sensitivity, surgical technique, patient weight and activity level.' additionally, the microport hip systems package insert lists 'allergic reactions to materials; metal sensitivity; or reactions to wear debris that may lead to histological reactions, pseudotumor and aseptic lymphocytic vasculitis-associated lesions (alval) as possible adverse effects associated with total hip arthroplasty.No conclusions regarding potential product contribution to the alleged complications can be determined from the available information.There were not any trends identified for this device and complaint type at the time of this complaint.Mpo will continue to monitor this complaint through complaint tracking.".
|
|
Allegedly, a patient with bmi over 40 and has advised legal that brought surgeon to follow up with hospital.Additional information received on 09-19-2025: the patient was experiencing pain, possibly from metal reaction between cocr modular neck and femoral stem.It was reported that bone and tissue was removed during the revision with visible evidence of a reaction.The cocr neck was replaced with a titanium modular neck.Additional information received on 01-27-2026: revision surgery was necessary due to corrosion at the neck-stem junction of the device.Medical records indicate, among other things: dark grey to black residue on the femoral neck component from that junction into the femoral stem; metallosis with soft tissue erosion; and tendon repairs related to tissue necrosis and pseudotumor formation.
|