|
The associated complaint devices were not returned for evaluation.A review of the complaint history for the listed parts revealed no prior complaints for the listed batches.A review of the manufacturing or product specifications did not reveal any abnormalities that could have contributed to the reported issue.Product was sterilized according to sterilization release documentation from quality control.Our clinical/medical team concluded:although it is unknown if the patient¿s immune disorder and comorbidities contributed to the abundant scar tissue/arthrofibrosis for which the mua was performed, arthrofibrosis is a known occurrence and possible complication post tka and not a failure of the prosthesis.There was insufficient supporting documentation of the reported cellulitis and antibiotic therapy; however, based on the lab results the reported erythema and suprapatellar swelling could have been secondary to the mua or other factors but not likely a result of the well-fixed prosthesis or a deep joint infection.The root cause of the gross instability secondary to medial-lateral ligament laxity for which the right tka revision was required cannot be concluded; however, the loss to follow up for approximately 2 years likely contributed to worsening symptoms and a prosthetic malfunction was not supported.The patient impact beyond the reported interventions, revision surgery, and expected post-procedural rehab cannot be concluded.No further medical assessment can be rendered at this time.Without the actual product involved, 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.
|