|
The associated complaint devices were not returned.A clinical evaluation was conducted and (b)(4): although it was reported that an mua was preformed no procedure documentation was provided for review.(b)(4): details regarding the patient¿s weight-bearing status, bone quality, and trauma history have not been provided.Based on the limited information provided and without the return of the device for evaluation the root cause of the reported instability cannot be determined however, during the revision it was found that the polyethylene was dissociated from the base plate, and this is likely a contributing factor to the instability.The patient impact beyond the revision itself cannot be concluded.(b)(4): based on the information provided, the ¿right knee stiffness¿ experienced by the patient was likely a normal progression of the post-operative healing phase and not a failure of the smith and nephew device.Information around the patient¿s post-operative rehabilitation prior to this mua was not provided.No further medical assessment is possible at this time based on the information provided.A review of complaint history on the listed parts revealed no prior complaints for the listed batches with the same failure mode.A review of the manufacturing records did not reveal a manufacturing abnormality that could have caused or contributed to the reported incident.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.No further actions are being taken at this time.
|