| Model Number |
230-03-01 |
| Medical Device Problem Codes |
Adverse Event Without Identified Device or Use Problem (2993); Loosening of Implant Not Related to Bone-Ingrowth (4002)
|
| Health Effect - Clinical Codes |
Failure of Implant (1924); Pain (1994)
|
| Date of Event |
10/01/2014
|
|
Type of Reportable Event
|
Serious Injury
|
|
Additional Manufacturer Narrative
|
|
This submission represents 1 of 163 events identified via active surveillance activities utilizing data from (b)(6).Follow-ups for additional information cannot be performed for this complaint as the information was submitted as complete by the registry; there is no identification of facilities or surgeons.All available information about the event and/or patient has been provided and it is not possible to obtain any of the devices.Additional information, including the product investigation, will be submitted within 30 days of receipt.
|
| |
|
Event or Problem Description
|
|
As reported by (b)(6), this (b)(6), female patient underwent primary total prosthetic replacement using cement of the right knee via medial parapatellar approach on (b)(6) 2011.The indication for the index procedure was osteoarthritis.The patient was implanted with a optetrak aysmetric femor (right size 1) (catalog 230-03-01, serial (b)(4)), optetrak knee system - cemented finned tibial tray - sizes 1f/1t 2f/1t (catalog 200-04-21, serial (b)(4)), optetrak knee system - cruciate retained (cr) tibial insert - size 1 - 18mm (catalog 200-21-18, serial (b)(4)) and heraeus medical antibiotic loaded high viscosity bone cement (catalog 66017569, serial (b)(4)).On (b)(6) 2014, approximately 44 months post implantation, the patient underwent revision due to aseptic loosening tibia; instability; pain.The exactech were removed and replaced with pfc« sigma tc3 femoral right size 2, mbt revision tibial tray cemented size 2 and tc3 rp tibial insert size 2 10mm.
|
| |
|
Additional Manufacturer Narrative
|
|
Section h10: (h3) the evaluation noted that revision reported was likely the result of an insufficient bond between the implant and the bone, which led to aseptic (non-infected) loosening, possibly secondary to increased biomechanical stress.However, this cannot be confirmed since the devices were not returned for evaluation.This submission represents 1 of 163 events identified via active surveillance activities utilizing data form the united kingdom national joint registry (uknjr).Follow-ups for additional information cannot be performed for this complaint as the information was submitted as complete by the registry; there is no identification of facilities or surgeons.All available information about the event and/or patient has been provided and it is not possible to obtain any of the devices.No information provided in the following section(s): a4, a5, and b6.
|
| |
|
Search Alerts/Recalls
|