|
The reason for this revision surgery was due to worn poly.The previous surgery and the surgery detailed in this investigation occurred 14 years apart.There was no information submitted with this complaint about any patient activities, accidents, or medical contraindications that may have contributed to the reported event.The healthcare professional indicated there was no delay in surgery and another suitable device was available for use.The surgery was completed as intended and without incident.The device was disposed of at the hospital and not made available to djo surgical for examination.A review of the implant device history records shows that the reported component used in the previous surgery, when released for use, met design and manufacturing requirements.There were no nonconforming material reports associated with the product that may have contributed to the reported event.The device was verified to have gone through an acceptable sterilization process and was within its expiration date at the time of the previous surgery.Customer complaint history of the reported device showed no present trends or on-going issues that are in need of review.The root cause of this complaint was a revision surgery due to worn poly.There are multiple factors that may contribute to an event that are outside of the control of djo surgical.
|