|
The reason for this revision surgery was patient had inhibited range of motion.The length of in vivo service as 3.2 months.The healthcare professional indicated there was no delay in surgery and another suitable device was available for use.The revision surgery was completed as intended.The device was disposed of at the hospital and not made available to djo surgical for examination.A review of the device history records showed no non-conforming material reports associated with the component listed in the complaint.A review of the product complaint report history showed this is the first complaint against this part and lot number.This event and revision surgery is the result, root cause, of excessive scar tissue in the patient's knee joint.The surgeon reported no issues associated with the explanted product.No other conditions relating to this event could be determined with confidence.This investigation produced no indications or suggestions of a product or process issue affecting implant safety or effectiveness.
|