|
An event regarding range of motion issues involving a triathlon insert was reported.The event was not confirmed.Method & results: device evaluation and results: not performed as product was not returned medical records received and evaluation: a review of the provided medical records and x-rays by a clinical consultant indicated: on (b)(6) 2018, a right total knee arthroplasty revision (changed liner and scar excision) was performed for a diagnosis of right knee arthrofibrosis.The operative report describes a tourniquet time of forty-one minutes.The operative report notes, ¿complains of pain and stiffness after neurectomy, no evidence of infection complete synovectomy and tenolysis to free up extensor mechanism liner removed noted to be in good condition changed to a 9mm ps insert 0° to 115° good stability.¿ uncomplicated surgery was described.X-ray printouts available for review include a series dated on (b)(6) 2018, which is an ap of the right knee, a patellar view of both knees and a lateral of the right knee, demonstrating a right total knee arthroplasty with an uncemented tibial and patellar component, a modular long-stem revision femoral component with hybrid cementation, and a distal cone augment.Nominal position of all components is noted.No primary right total knee operative report, no x-rays or bone scan images to confirm loose primary femoral component, and no examination of the explanted primary femoral component is available.No clinical or past medical history regarding either conditions or medications that may discouraged biologic fixation of the femoral component or radiographic evidence of good primary prosthesis/bone contact are available.Based upon the information available for review, no determination can be made regarding the cause of the alleged failure of bony fixation of the uncemented femoral component fifteen months post implantation in this case.The subsequent surgery for arthrofibrosis was not related to factors of implant design, manufacturing or materials and is a common complication of total knee arthroplasty surgery.Device history review: all devices were manufactured and accepted into final stock with no relevant reported discrepancies.Complaint history review: there have been no other similar events for the reported lot.Conclusion: the exact cause of the event could not be determined because insufficient information was provided.Additional information, including operative reports, progress notes, x-rays and return of the device are needed to fully investigate the event.If further information becomes available or the product is returned, this investigation will be re-opened.
|