|
The agent reported, "reason for revision surgery was wear on the poly insert after years of the original poly insert being in.So the surgeon did a poly swap to address the issue.Male 70".The actual length of in-vivo for the items listed is unknown as the original surgery date was not provided or could be established."
item number: 391-13-708,
item description: insert, 3d ex sz 8lt 13mm,
lot#: unknown,
part revision: na,
product type: knee,
manufacture date: unknown,
expiration date: unknown.This evaluation is limited in scope as the item(s) associated with this investigation was not returned to djo surgical - austin for examination.The surgery was completed as intended and without incident.If additional information regarding the reported event is submitted at a future date, this investigation will be re-evaluated.There was no information submitted with this complaint about any patient activities, accidents, or medical contraindications that may have contributed to the reported event.There were no findings during this evaluation that indicate that the reported device(s) was defective.The surgeon performed this procedure to remedy the patient's condition.No further action is deemed necessary.Root cause:
the root cause of this complaint was a revision surgery due to wear of the polyethylene insert after long-term implantation.No information was submitted with the complaint regarding pre-existing conditions of the patient or any activities the patient was involved in that may have contributed to the event.There are multiple factors that may contribute to an event that are outside of the control of enovis surgical.Containment:
inventory containment is not required as there are no indications of a product or process issue affecting implant safety or effectiveness.The revision surgery was completed successfully.Device history records review:
given the limited information, an extensive search of djo records for an invoice of the previous surgery produced no results, therefore, without the records this investigation cannot lead to a firm conclusion.Containment:
inventory containment is not required as there are no indications of a product or process issue affecting implant safety or effectiveness.The revision surgery was completed successfully.Complaint history:
customer complaint history of the reported device(s) showed no present trends or ongoing issues that need review.
|