Complaint sample was evaluated and the reported event was not confirmed.Visual evaluation of the returned articular surface identified no cosmetic problem.Dimensional inspection found that the thickness at the lowest point of the condylar surface, the overall thickness, and the lateral width were all within tolerance.The antero-posterior width was found to be out of tolerance (larger than the maximum specified dimension) but the device was autoclaved prior to its return, which could have altered the dimensions.Dhr was reviewed and no discrepancies were found.Review of the complaint history determined that no further action is required as no were trends identified.The size c 26mm trial and the size b 26mm final have the same thickness at the lowest point of the condylar surface, however, their overall thickness as well as the radii of curvature of the condylar surfaces are very different.The surgical technique clearly states to "insert the appropriate size articular surface provisional", when performing trial reduction.Therefore, it was concluded that user error is the root cause of the reported issue.A summary of the investigation was sent to the complainant conveying proper surgical technique and use of the device.If any further information is found which would change or alter any conclusions or information, a supplemental will be filed accordingly.Zimmer biomet will continue to monitor for trends.
|