|
The reported event could not be confirmed, because the product was not returned for investigation and the information provided was not sufficient.No lot number was provided, thus a review of the specific manufacturing batch records and related quality documents (manufacturing documents, inspection plan, inspection drawing and release report) cannot be performed.Therefore it is also not possible to determine the quantity released for distribution within the affected lot.To obtain more details about the complained event, the sales rep was contacted.No pre-operative images could be provided that illustrate the implant position relatively to the eye.Also no information about the experience level of the involved surgeons with respect to orbital floor reconstructions was available.It was additionally unknown if swelling was involved in the initial surgery that might caused the orbital contents not to be in an accurate position during the initial procedure.Finally it was stated that the orbital floor plate was replaced by ¿a straight 0.85 medpor implant¿, because there was still a small defect the surgeon wanted to place the implant over.Finally the r&d expert for neuro screws was contacted to assess this complaint.He stated that the currently complained neuro screws are not intended to be used for midface-applications.Thus this application is considered as off-label use that might have contributed to a non ideal reconstruction of the orbital floor and the resulting complained double vision of the patient.Based on the investigation, the corresponding statistical evaluation as well as the assessment of the stryker r&d expert for neuro screws there is no indication for a not correctly working product or any systematic design, material or manufacturing related issue.Therefore no further corrective and / or preventive actions are deemed necessary at that time.The complaint is added to the complaint trend.
|