|
The reason for this revision surgery was the shell disassociated from the stem on the humeral side.The in-vivo length of patient service for the implant was 6 years and 5 months.At the revision only the glenoid head was replaced and supplied by djo surgical.An inquiry to the field agent revealed the socket insert, humeral stem and socket shell were provided by another manufacturer.There are no reported pre-existing patient health conditions.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 implant device history records (dhr) shows that the reported component used in the previous surgery met design and manufacturing requirements.There were no non-conforming material reports (ncmrs) associated with the product that may have contributed to the event.The device was within its expiration date at the time of use during the previous surgery.Customer complaint history of the reported device showed no present trends or on-going issues that are in need of review.This event is deemed to be non-product related.The root cause of this complaint was a revision surgery due to the disassociated shell from the stem.There are multiple factors which may cause the event that are outside the control of djo surgical are patient activities, patient weight, excessive range-of-motion, soft tissue impingement, trauma or low bone density.No additional 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 shoulder failure and hence a definitive root cause cannot be determined.Inventory containment is not required as there are no indications of a product or process issue affecting implant safety or effectiveness.
|