|
The reason for this revision surgery was knee damage and instability.The length of the in-vivo service was 3 years.The complaint states the patient fell and damaged her knee; the surgeon performed a knee revision and replaced the original insert with an upsized poly insert.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 (dhrs) revealed no discrepancies or issues with the manufacturing history of this part.All parts were found to meet design and manufacturing specifications.No non-conforming material reports (ncmr's) were associated with this part.The product complaint report history was reviewed and no trends or on-going issues were deemed as present or in need of review.This event is deemed to be non-product related.The root cause for knee damage and instability was a patient fall.The scope of this investigation is limited without having the parts available to djo surgical for evaluation.Other conditions relating to this event could not be determined with confidence.Inventory containment is not required as there are no indications of a product or process issue affecting implant safety or effectiveness.
|