|
The reason for this revision surgery was due to the patient falling and the surgeon choosing to change the insert.The in-vivo length of patient service for the implant was 2.9 months.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 device history records (dhrs) revealed no discrepancies or issues with the manufacturing of this part.All critical dimensions, design criteria and specifications in effect at the time the part was manufactured were met.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 as non-product related.The root cause for this event was the patient had a fall and the surgeon decided to exchange the knee insert.The scope of this investigation is limited without having the explanted parts available to djo surgical for evaluation.Other conditions relating to this event could not be determined with confidence.Inventory containment is not required since there are no indications of a product or process issue affecting implant safety or effectiveness.
|