Skip to content

Tornier Perform® Reversed Glenoid DWJ140Recalls & reported problems

Tornier, Inc. · Central Screw · Class 2 · Implant

All models of Tornier Perform Reversed Glenoid (41)

Data updated Oct 18, 2026 from official FDA records · Editorial policy

Adverse event reports
3
Deaths reported
0
Injuries reported
3
Recalls naming it
0

Summary

The FDA's MAUDE database contains 3 adverse event reports that list this exact device (DI 00846832089895), received between Aug 19, 2024 and Mar 2, 2026 — classified as 3 injuries.

The most frequently reported specific device problem is “Difficult to Advance” (1 report).

Reports come from manufacturers, hospitals and patients and are not verified by the FDA. A report does not prove the device caused the event, and counts can't be used to compare devices or estimate failure rates. What reports can and can't tell you · How this data works · Data updated Oct 18, 2026.

Reports received per month

Nov 2023: 0 reportsDec 2023: 0 reportsJan 2024: 0 reportsFeb 2024: 0 reportsMar 2024: 0 reportsApr 2024: 0 reportsMay 2024: 0 reportsJun 2024: 0 reportsJul 2024: 0 reportsAug 2024: 1 reportsSep 2024: 0 reportsOct 2024: 0 reportsNov 2024: 0 reportsDec 2024: 0 reportsJan 2025: 0 reportsFeb 2025: 0 reportsMar 2025: 0 reportsApr 2025: 0 reportsMay 2025: 0 reportsJun 2025: 0 reportsJul 2025: 1 reportsAug 2025: 0 reportsSep 2025: 0 reportsOct 2025: 0 reportsNov 2025: 0 reportsDec 2025: 0 reportsJan 2026: 0 reportsFeb 2026: 0 reportsMar 2026: 1 reportsApr 2026: 0 reportsMay 2026: 0 reportsJun 2026: 0 reportsJul 2026: 0 reportsAug 2026: 0 reportsSep 2026: 0 reportsOct 2026: 0 reports2024202520261
Last 36 months. The most recent month may be incomplete.

Most reported problems

Device problems

  • Adverse Event Without Identified Device or Use Problem2
  • Difficult to Advance1
  • Mechanical Jam1

Patient problems

  • Fluid Discharge1
  • Foreign Body In Patient1
  • Pain1
  • Post Operative Wound Infection1
  • Unspecified Infection1

Recent adverse event reports

The 3 most recent of 3 reports, in the reporter's own words as published by the FDA.

  • InjuryMar 2, 2026Adverse Event Without Identified Device or Use Problem

    THE PATIENT UNDERWENT A REVISION SURGERY. PATIENT HAD SHOWN SIGNS OF INFECTION AND WAS DRAINING FROM THE HEALED INCISION SITE. NO INSTABILITY WAS REPORTED OR OBSERVED. CULTURES WERE PERFORMED INTRAOPERATIVELY. THE PATIENTS 3YR OLD WOUND WAS DRAINING FOR THE LAST 3-4 WEEKS AND THE DOCTOR DECIDED TO REMOVE ALL THE IMPLANTS AND IMPLANT AN ANTIBIOTIC SPACER.

    Patient problems: Fluid Discharge; Post Operative Wound Infection; Unspecified Infection

    MAUDE report 24482703 ↗
  • InjuryJul 1, 2025Adverse Event Without Identified Device or Use Problem; Adverse Event Without Identified Device or Use Problem

    PATIENT UNDERWENT REVISION SURGERY DUE TO ALLEGED PAIN AND SUPERIOR MIGRATION OF THE GLENOID IMPLANT.

    Patient problems: Pain

    MAUDE report 22375679 ↗
  • InjuryAug 19, 2024Difficult to Advance; Mechanical Jam; Difficult to Advance; Mechanical Jam

    IT WAS REPORTED THE TIP OF THE SCREWDRIVER BROKE OFF IN THE BASEPLATE DURING INSERTION. A COUPLE OF MILLIMETERS OF THE CENTRAL SCREW WERE STILL NOT ENGAGED INTO THE GLENOID. SEVERAL ATTEMPTS WERE MADE TO REMOVE THE BROKEN PIECE OF THE SCREWDRIVER. A VARIETY OF SNAPS, PICKS AND EVEN A HYPO NEEDLE WERE USED TO TRY TO UNSEAT THE BROKEN TIP. THOUGH PARTS OF THE TIP CAME OUT IT WAS NOT ABLE TO BE FULLY REMOVED. VARIOUS SUCTION TIPS WERE ALSO USED TO TRY TO GET THIS PIECE OUT. AN ATTEMPT WAS MADE TO REMOVE BASEPLATE FROM CENTRAL SCREW, HOWEVER THE BASEPLATE TURNED INDEFINITELY ON CENTRAL SCREW EVEN WITH TRACTION. THIS WAS TRIED IN BOTH CLOCKWISE AND THEN COUNTERCLOCKWISE FASHIONS. SURGEON EVEN TRIED DOING THESE STEPS WHILE APPLYING PRESSURE TO IMPLANT WITH TURNING IT. BOTH BASEPLATE INSERTED AND BASEPLATE REMOVAL TOOL WERE ALSO USED TO ATTEMPT THESE STEPS. EVENTUALLY SURGEON OPTED TO USE A METAL BUR TO CUT SCREW FROM BASEPLATE. A NEW BASEPLATE WAS OPENED; HOWEVER, NO CENTRAL FIXATION COULD BE UTILIZED AS MUCH OF THE SCREW COULD NOT BE REMOVED. FIXATION WAS OBTAINED USING BOSS AND PERIPHERAL SCREWS AS CENTRAL HOLE WAS NOT ABLE TO BE USED DUE TO CUT OFF SCREW. SURGEON ELECTED TO DO THIS A

    Patient problems: Foreign Body In Patient

    MAUDE report 20000069 ↗

Other PROSTHESIS, SHOULDER, SEMI-CONSTRAINED, METAL/POLYMER CEMENTED devices

All PROSTHESIS, SHOULDER, SEMI-CONSTRAINED, METAL/POLYMER CEMENTED devices →

Sources and updates

How reports and recalls are matched · Editorial policy · Report an error on this page