|
The associated complaint devices were not returned.The clinical/medical team concluded, this case reports a journey ii bcs retro study subject#: (b)(4).This event was classified as severe, possibly related to the device and procedure.Ae#:2-left knee laceration, onset (b)(6) 2015, patient presented to ed with a laceration to his left knee.He was squatting deeply when his incision split apart.Wound closure with nylon suture done, dressed.No antibiotics were given.Ae#2 deep peri-prosthetic infection, (b)(6) 2015 he presented at ed, per urging of family members.Ed physician concerned and notified operating surgeon's clinic.Seen by surgeons wound with significant drainage and local cellulitis, swelling not observed in limb.Small joint effusion.A partial revision of left tka, i&d polyethylene insert was performed on (b)(6) 2015.No clinically supporting documentation has been provided for inclusion in this investigation.Without the explant or the requested clinical information, we are unable to determine to root cause of the knee laceration/deep peri-prosthetic infection.Since this event has been reported as resolved no further clinical/medical assessment is warranted at this time.A review of the production documentation for the corresponding products did not reveal any deviation from the standard manufacturing processes.A review of complaint history for the listed parts revealed no prior complaints for the listed batches.Product was sterilized according to sterilization release documentation from quality control.Without the actual product involved and/or device information our investigation cannot proceed.If the device or new information is received in the future, this complaint can be re-opened.We consider this investigation closed.
|