|
MENTOR TEXAS MENTOR MEMORYGEL BREAST IMPLANT; PROSTHESIS, BREAST, NONINFLATABLE, INTERNAL, SILICONE GEL-FILLED
|
Back to Search Results |
|
| Catalog Number |
3543501 |
| Medical Device Problem Code |
Material Rupture (1546)
|
| Health Effect - Clinical Codes |
Capsular Contracture (1761); Deformity/ Disfigurement (2360)
|
| Date of Event |
03/15/2025
|
|
Type of Reportable Event
|
Serious Injury
|
|
Additional Manufacturer Narrative
|
|
On march 10, 2026, mentor received additional information.An update event date was provided.Date of event: 3/15/2025.The patient was also diagnosed with bilateral baker grade iii (left breast) and ii (right breast) capsular contracture during a physical exam with some breast tenderness/pain.Furthermore, during the surgery a silicone granuloma was identified in the left breast and removed.Reason for device explant and/or reoperation: capsular contracture.This report is for the right breast prosthesis.The manufacturer's reference number: (b)(4).
|
| |
|
Additional Manufacturer Narrative
|
|
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: 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.If certain information is unknown, not available or does not apply, the section/field of the form is left blank.Manufacturer¿s reference number: (b)(4).
|
| |
|
Event or Problem Description
|
|
It was reported that a patient underwent a breast augmentation revision surgery with implantation of a 350cc mentor memorygel breast implant prosthesis.Post-operatively, the patient was diagnosed with bilaterally ruptured implants during magnetic resonance imaging.As a result, the patient underwent bilateral exchange with mentor gel implants on (b)(6) 2026.
|
| |
|
Additional Manufacturer Narrative
|
|
On april 09, 2026, the mentor analysis lab received the suspect medical device for evaluation.On april 16, 2026, mentor completed an evaluation on the returned device.Device evaluation: mentor conducted visual inspection and leak testing of the device.Visual analysis of the returned device revealed that the breast implant had an area of siltex cracking on the posterior view.Leak testing was performed, according with mentor procedure, and it revealed a tear within the siltex cracking, measuring approximately 0.4 cm.No more areas of gel exposure.The evaluation determined that the possible cause of the rupture is consistent with normal wear.Siltex cracking is defined as a material separation occurring in the siltex layer and can eventually progress through the shell of siltex devices.Siltex cracking is ultimately a result of high stresses.Regarding the reported capsular contracture condition, there are not enough details to determine the factors that may have caused this condition.Capsular contracture in the patient¿s breast might be the result of the body¿s individual physiological response to the implantation of a foreign object in soft tissue.Further, capsular contracture is a known complication associated with these devices and is referenced in our current product insert data sheet.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, and that normal wear may have caused the observed defect.No corrective and preventive action (capa) is required now.Manufacturer¿s reference number: (b)(4).
|
| |
|
Search Alerts/Recalls
|
|
|