Device history records (dhr): the device manufacturing quality records indicate that the released components met all requirements to perform as intended.No trend considering the following event is identified: ceramic head breakage.Event summary: it was reported that a ceramic head broke on (b)(6) 2018 in a left hip without trauma.Review of received data: 6 x-ray pictures were received: pelvic overview, left hip ap-projection: postoperative images with lying redone-drainage.Status after implantation of a cementless hip total endoprosthesis.No abnormalities, prosthesis stem orthograde, cup inclination angle about 42 degrees.Pelvic overview, left hip ap-projection: breakage of the femoral head, unchanged cup position, comparatively to the pre-x-ray, no change of findings in the stem area pelvic overview, left hip ap-projection: no visible changes of findings, femoral head in correct position.The surgery report of revision was received.Diagnosis: breakage of the ceramic head, inserted total hip endoprosthesis therapy: one-time change of ceramic head and pe inlay.Intraoperatively: in right side position skin incision through the existing scar with dilation.After visualization of the joint recognizable neocapsule with considerable scarring.Larger and smaller ceramic fragments are removed.The cone appears undamaged except for minor traces of wear.After ventralisation of the prosthetic cone knocking out the pe inlays.Subsequent removal of another ceramic fragments.The prosthesis cup showed no signs of loosening.Unspecifically described introduction of a new pe inlay and femoral head.Devices analysis: no product was returned to zimmer biomet for in-depth analysis, it was discarded.Review of product documentation: the compatibility check was performed from www.Productcompatibility.Zimmer.Com and showed that the product combination was approved by zimmer biomet.Root cause analysis: root cause determination using dfmea: fracture of head due to fracture of head due to insufficient material thickness (wrong design): not possible: burst strength testing is validated.Loss of connection, fracture of ceramic head due to inappropriate design concerning pull-off/torque strength of the head on the stem taper: not possible: a systematic issue with design and/or material properties would have been detected as part of the issue evaluation assessment.Loss of connection, fracture of ceramic head due to particles between stem and head taper: possible: there is no information available whether some particles were observed or not, no revision surgery report was available for review.Therefore cannot be excluded.Fracture of head to due stem taper corrosion (increasing of volume) due to wrong material pairing: possible: there is no information available whether some particles were observed or not, no revision surgery report was available for review.Therefore cannot be excluded.Mal-function of tha (wear, fracture, dislocation etc.) due to wrong size of head diameter and/or offset: not possible: no issue with size indicated.Mal-function of tha (wear, fracture, dislocation etc.) due to wrong material combinations: possible: the material combination is unknown, therefore cannot be excluded.Mal-function of tha (wear, fracture, dislocation etc.) due to off label use, combination with competitor products: possible: the material combination is unknown, therefore cannot be excluded.High wear, head fracture due to wrong raw material selection: not possible: raw material was checked.No deviations were noted.Loss of connection, fracture of ceramic heady due to use on a used or damaged stem taper: possible: no information regarding the stem was received, therefore cannot be excluded.Patient behaviour leads to premature failure due to inadequate information during patients counseling by surgeon: possible: it is possible that the patient did not follow the restrictions.Conclusion summary: it was reported that a ceramic head broke on (b)(6) 2018 in a left hip without trauma.The device was implanted on (b)(6) 2015 and revised on (b)(6) 2018 due to a ceramic head breakage.On the provided x-rays the breakage can be seen.The surgical report of explantation do not show any relevant information.There are several factors which could have contributed to the ceramic head breakage.A wrong patient behaviour can be the cause for the breakage or a malfunction of the tha.However, an exact root cause could not be determined.The need for corrective measures is not indicated and zimmer gmbh considers this case as closed.Zimmer biomet¿s reference number of this file is (b)(4).
|