|
The reason for this revision surgery was reported as a subsided stem.The previous surgery and the revision detailed in this investigation occurred 2 years and 3 months apart.Initial and prolonged hospitalization was required.The healthcare professional indicated there was no delay in surgery and another suitable device was available for use.The revision surgery was completed as intended.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 (dhr) shows that the reported component used in the previous surgery met design and manufacturing requirements.There were no non-conforming material reports (ncmrs) associated with the product that may have contributed to the event.The device was within its expiration date at the time of use during 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 subsided stem.There were no findings during this investigation that indicate that the reported device was the source or had a direct connection with the patient's event.Agent has clearly mentioned that "the patient's stem had subsided, so the surgeon removed it and replaced it with a revision stem." it seems that the event might have possibly occurred due to inadequate soft tissue support, excessive range of motion, patient activities or trauma.No additional information was submitted with the complaint regarding pre-existing conditions of the patient or any patient activities that may have contributed to the event and hence a definitive root cause cannot be determined.There are no indications of a product or process issue affecting implant safety or effectiveness.
|