| Model Number |
82-7-0708 |
| Medical Device Problem Code |
Fracture (1260)
|
| Health Effect - Clinical Codes |
Pain (1994); Injury (2348); Ambulation or Postural Difficulties (2544)
|
| Date of Event |
10/22/2019
|
|
Type of Reportable Event
|
Serious Injury
|
|
Additional Manufacturer Narrative
|
|
It was noted that the device is not available for evaluation.If additional information is received, it will be provided in a supplemental report upon completion of the investigation.
|
| |
|
Event or Problem Description
|
|
Our company representative reported that " knee surgery on (b)(6) 2015 came with the complaint of knee pain.During the revision surgery on (b)(6) 2019, doctor realized that the tibial ps insert rostrum was broken.".
|
| |
|
Event or Problem Description
|
|
Our company representative reported that " knee surgery on (b)(6) 2015 came with the complaint of knee pain.During the revision surgery on (b)(6) 2019, doctor realized that the tibial ps insert rostrum was broken.".
|
| |
|
Additional Manufacturer Narrative
|
|
Correction: update to lot code.An event regarding crack/fracture involving a scorpio insert was reported.The event was confirmed via evaluation of the returned device.Method & results.Product evaluation and results: visual inspection was performed as part of the material analysis report mar, dated 20-jan-2020.This inspection indicated that the returned tibial insert had fractured at the post.The fracture occurred in fatigue and propagated posteriorly.The damage on the articulating surface of the insert was consistent with burnishing, scratching, and third body indentations; which are common damage modes of uhmwpe.Based on the given information, no identifiable materials or manufacturing discrepancies were observed on the surfaces examined.Medical records received and evaluation: no medical records were received for review with a clinical consultant.Product history review: a review of the device manufacturing records indicate that all devices accepted into final stock were free from discrepancies.Complaint history review: there have been no other similar events for the lot referenced.Conclusions: visual inspection of the returned device indicated that the returned tibial insert had fractured at the post.The fracture occurred in fatigue and propagated posteriorly.The damage on the articulating surface of the insert was consistent with burnishing, scratching, and third body indentations; which are common damage modes of uhmwpe.Based on the given information, no identifiable materials or manufacturing discrepancies were observed on the surfaces examined.The exact cause of the event could not be determined because insufficient information was provided.Further information such as pathology reports, pre- and post-operative x-rays and the primary operative report as well as patient history and follow-up notes are needed to complete the investigation for determining root cause.No further investigation for this event is possible at this time.If additional information becomes available to indicate further evaluation is warranted, this record will be reopened.
|
| |
|
Search Alerts/Recalls
|