Skip to content

Arcos Modular Revision Hip System 11-300918Recalls & reported problems

Biomet Orthopedics, LLC · Class 2 · Implant

All models of Arcos Modular Revision Hip System (71)

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

Adverse event reports
1
Deaths reported
0
Injuries reported
1
Recalls naming it
0

Summary

The FDA's MAUDE database contains 1 adverse event report that list this exact device (DI 00880304474284), received between Oct 23, 2024 and Oct 23, 2024 — classified as 1 injury.

The most frequently reported specific device problem is “Loosening of Implant Not Related to Bone-Ingrowth” (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: 0 reportsSep 2024: 0 reportsOct 2024: 1 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: 0 reportsAug 2025: 0 reportsSep 2025: 0 reportsOct 2025: 0 reportsNov 2025: 0 reportsDec 2025: 0 reportsJan 2026: 0 reportsFeb 2026: 0 reportsMar 2026: 0 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

  • Loosening of Implant Not Related to Bone-Ingrowth1
  • Positioning Failure1

Patient problems

  • Failure of Implant1

Recent adverse event reports

The 1 most recent of 1 reports, in the reporter's own words as published by the FDA.

  • InjuryOct 23, 2024Positioning Failure; Loosening of Implant Not Related to Bone-Ingrowth; Positioning Failure; Loosening of Implant Not Related to Bone-Ingrowth

    IT WAS REPORTED THAT THE PATIENT UNDERWENT A RIGHT TOTAL HIP ARTHROPLASTY ON AN UNKNOWN DATE. SUBSEQUENTLY, THE PATIENT WAS REVISED DUE TO A PERIPROSTHETIC FRACTURE. DURING THE PROCEDURE, THERE WAS ISSUES WITH THE INSERTER. ATTEMPTS WERE MADE TO FIX THE PROXIMAL BODY TO THE DISTAL STEM IN A REAM-OVER TECHNIQUE. HOWEVER, IT WOULD NOT WORK DESPITE THE TECHNIQUE BEING UTILIZED. MULTIPLE ATTEMPTS WERE TRIED TO ASSEMBLE THE CORRECT INSTRUMENTATION TO NO AVAIL. THE SURGEON THEN ATTEMPTED TO FIX THE PROXIMAL BODY TO THE DISTAL STEM USING A BASTARDISED TECHNIQUE TO FIX THE STEM AND PROXIMAL BODY TOGETHER. THERE WAS A 25-MINUTE DELAY DURING SURGERY DUE TO INSTRUMENTATION NOT WORKING. AFTER THE CASE, IT WAS DETERMINED THAT THE GREY INSERTION HANDLE WAS DAMAGED AND BURRED AT THE INSERTION END WHICH DID NOT ALLOW THE ASSEMBLY ROD TO ENTER. THERE WAS NO DAMAGE NOTED TO THE INSTRUMENT PRIOR TO USE. IT WAS REPORTED THAT THERE WAS NO ISSUE WITH THE STEM OR PROXIMAL BODY IMPLANTS. THE FOLLOWING DAY, AN X-RAY SHOWED THAT THE STEM AND PROXIMAL BODY HAD A DUBIOUS COUPLING. IT WAS ALSO NOTED THAT THE PROXIMAL BODY WAS HUNG UP ON THE MEDIAL CALCAR AND WAS NOT SEATED IN THE PROXIMAL REAMED BONE. THE SURG

    Patient problems: Failure of Implant

    MAUDE report 20516179 ↗

Other Prosthesis, hip, hemi-, femoral, metal/polymer, cemented or uncemented devices

All Prosthesis, hip, hemi-, femoral, metal/polymer, cemented or uncemented devices →

Sources and updates

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