Skip to content

Arthrex® AR-9121-03Recalls & reported problems

Arthrex, Inc. · UNIVERSAL GLENOID - INLAY LARGE · Class 2 · Implant

Data updated Oct 16, 2026 from official FDA records · Editorial policy

Adverse event reports
8
Deaths reported
0
Injuries reported
5
Recalls naming it
0

Summary

The FDA's MAUDE database contains 8 adverse event reports that list this exact device (DI 00888867057432), received between Apr 30, 2019 and Jul 26, 2024 — classified as 5 injuries, 3 malfunctions.

The most frequently reported specific device problem is “Patient Device Interaction Problem” (2 reports).

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 16, 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: 2 reportsJul 2024: 1 reportsAug 2024: 0 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: 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 reports2024202520262
Last 36 months. The most recent month may be incomplete.

Most reported problems

Device problems

  • Patient Device Interaction Problem2
  • Positioning Failure2
  • Appropriate Device Problem Term/Code Not Available1
  • Break1
  • Defective Device1
  • Degraded1
  • Detachment of Device or Device Component1
  • Device Dislodged or Dislocated1

Patient problems

  • Insufficient Information3
  • Failure of Implant2
  • No Clinical Signs, Symptoms or Conditions2
  • Fall1
  • Hypersensitivity/Allergic reaction1
  • Metal Related Pathology1
  • Pain1

Recent adverse event reports

The 8 most recent of 8 reports, in the reporter's own words as published by the FDA.

  • InjuryJul 26, 2024Patient Device Interaction Problem; Patient Device Interaction Problem

    IT WAS REPORTED THAT A REVISION SURGERY WAS NECESSARY DUE TO A METALLOSIS. THE IMPLANT WAS IMPLANTED FOUR YEARS AGO WITH BONE GRAFT AUGMENTATION. NO FURTHER INFORMATION WAS PROVIDED. UPDATE DW 12-JUL-2024: FURTHER INFORMATION WERE PROVIDED THAT DURING AN INITIAL SURGERY ON (B)(6) 2020 THE FOLLOWING DEVICES WERE IMPLANTED DUE TO AN OMARTHROSIS WITH B2 GLENOID SITUATION WITH A RETRO OF JUST UNDER 30 DEGREES. AR-9120-03, AR-9165-25NL, AR-9145-36, AR-9121-03, AR-9300-45CPC, AR-9301-04. ON (B)(6) 2024 THE REVISION SURGERY WAS PERFORMED. AS PART OF THE REVISION THE ECLIPSE AND UNIVERSAL GLENOID WERE ALL REMOVED DUE TO A SEVERE METALLOSIS. THE SURGEON DECIDED TO FIRST BUILD UP THE GLENOID WITH ALLOGRAFT IN A TWO-SIDED PROCEDURE AND TO INSERT A CEMENT SPACER ON THE HUMERUS SIDE. IN THE SECOND STEP - A UNIVERS REVERSE WILL BE INSERTED IN AUTUMN WITH PLANNING.

    Patient problems: Metal Related Pathology

    MAUDE report 19837473 ↗
  • MalfunctionJun 21, 2024Positioning Failure; Positioning Failure

    ADDITIONAL INFORMATION RECEIVED ON 7/23/2024: THE INTENDED PROCEDURE WAS AN ANATOMIC SHOULDER WITH A UNIVERSAL CONVERTIBLE BASEPLATE BUT SINCE THE ARTHREX UNIVERSAL GLENOID WOULD NOT PRESS ONTO THE BASEPLATE, THE SURGEON COMPLETED THE CASE AS A REVERSE PROCEDURE. THE CASE WAS NOT DELAYED, AND ADDITIONAL ANESTHESIA WAS NOT NEEDED. THE PATIENT SUFFERED NO NEGATIVE EFFECTS ON OR AFTER THE PROCEDURE.

    Patient problems: Insufficient Information; No Clinical Signs, Symptoms or Conditions

    MAUDE report 19579895 ↗
  • MalfunctionJun 20, 2024Positioning Failure; Fitting Problem; Positioning Failure; Fitting Problem

    ADDITIONAL INFORMATION RECEIVED ON 7/23/2024: THE INTENDED PROCEDURE WAS AN ANATOMIC SHOULDER WITH A UNIVERSAL CONVERTIBLE BASEPLATE BUT SINCE THE ARTHREX UNIVERSAL GLENOID WOULD NOT PRESS ONTO THE BASEPLATE, THE SURGEON COMPLETED THE CASE AS A REVERSE PROCEDURE. THE CASE WAS NOT DELAYED, AND ADDITIONAL ANESTHESIA WAS NOT NEEDED. THE PATIENT SUFFERED NO NEGATIVE EFFECTS ON OR AFTER THE PROCEDURE.

    Patient problems: No Clinical Signs, Symptoms or Conditions

    MAUDE report 19576766 ↗
  • InjuryJun 26, 2023Patient Device Interaction Problem; Patient Device Interaction Problem

    ON 6/2/2023, IT WAS REPORTED BY A PATIENT THAT AN ARTHREX ECLIPSE STEMLESS HUMERAL IMPLANT AND CONVERTIBLE UNIVERSAL GLENOID PRODUCTS WERE IMPLANTED DURING A SHOULDER REPLACEMENT PROCEDURE ON (B)(6) 2023. THE PATIENT IS EXPERIENCING A POSSIBLE UNSPECIFIED REACTION. NO FURTHER INFORMATION HAS BEEN PROVIDED. ADDITIONAL INFORMATION RECEIVED.

    Patient problems: Hypersensitivity/Allergic reaction

    MAUDE report 17199320 ↗
  • InjuryApr 28, 2023Defective Device; Device Dislodged or Dislocated; Defective Device; Device Dislodged or Dislocated

    IT WAS REPORTED THAT A REVISION SURGERY WAS NECESSARY AS THE INLAY WAS DISLOCATED. THE INLAY AND THE HUMERAL HEAD WERE REPLACED. NO FURTHER INFORMATION RECEIVED.

    Patient problems: Failure of Implant; Insufficient Information

    MAUDE report 16838478 ↗
  • InjuryMay 9, 2022Degraded

    IT WAS REPORTED THAT ONE YEAR AFTER THE IMPLANTATION OF A RIGHT SHOULDER TOTAL ENDO-PROSTHESIS ECLIPSE ON (B)(6) 2016, POLYETHYLENE DEGRADATION WAS IDENTIFIED POST-OPERATIVELY. THIS RESULTED IN A BONE DEFECT WHICH LED TO A REVISION SURGERY TO CHANGE THE IMPLANT TO AN INVERSE PROSTHESIS.

    Patient problems: Failure of Implant

    MAUDE report 14336843 ↗
  • MalfunctionDec 28, 2020Detachment of Device or Device Component; Appropriate Device Problem Term/Code Not Available

    IT WAS REPORTED THAT THE PATIENT NEEDED TO HAVE A REVISION ON HIS SHOULDER. ORIGINAL DOS (B)(6) 2019 FOR A TOTAL SHOULDER. PER THE PATIENT, HE WAS SWATTING A FLY AND THE PLASTIC PIECE OF THE GLENOID DETACHED IN HIS SHOULDER. THE REVISION CASE WAS (B)(6) 2020. AN AR-9121-03 AND THE STEM (UNKNOWN PART #) WERE REMOVED. THE CASE WAS CONVERTED TO A REVERSE SHOULDER, A 42 GLENOPSHERE AND CUP WERE IMPLANTED. PATIENT IS MALE, (B)(6) YEARS.

    Patient problems: Insufficient Information

    MAUDE report 11075959 ↗
  • InjuryApr 30, 2019Break

    IT WAS REPORTED BY THE PATIENT THAT HE HAD A SHOULDER SURGERY ON (B)(6) 2014. HE EXPERIENCED A TRAUMA ON (B)(6) 2018. HE FELL ON AN ICE PLATE IN WINTER. ON (B)(6) 2018 IT WAS NOTICED THAT THE PE-INLAY IMPLANT BROKE. THE IMPLANT WAS REMOVED ON (B)(6) 2018. A NEW IMPLANT WAS IMPLANTED ON (B)(6) 2018. NO FURTHER INFORMATION HAD BEEN MADE AVAILABLE. WE DO NOT HAVE ANY INFORMATION ON PART NUMBER / IF IT IS AN ARTHREX DEVICE / WHICH CUSTOMER WAS THE OPERATING HOSPITAL ETC. ARTHREX IS STILL WORKING ON RECEIVING FURTHER INFORMATION SO THIS INCIDENT CAN BE EVALUATED. UPDATE 08-APR-19: FOLLOWING DEVICES WERE IMPLANTED ON INITIAL SURGERY: AR-9349-20 (LOT.: 1295124702), AR-9301-02 (LOT.: 2501338911), AR-9121-03 (LOT.: 1031003), AR-9300-49CPC (2501321807). ONLY AR-9121-03 BROKE. UPDATE 09-APR-19: IT WAS ALSO MENTIONED THAT DUE TO PAIN IN THE LEFT SHOULDER AN ARTHROSCOPY IN THE LEFT SHOULDER TOOK PLACE FOR CONTROL. IT WAS NOT POSSIBLE FOR THE CUSTOMER TO TELL US IF THOSE IMPLANTS WERE ARTHREX DEVICES. NO PART NUMBERS OR LOT NUMBERS AVAILABLE. BUT THE SURGEON CONFIRMED THAT THERE WAS NOTHING WRONG WITH THE IMPLANT IN THE LEFT SHOULDER. HE CANT PROVIDE US THE INFORMATION WHERE THE PAIN IN THE PATI

    Patient problems: Fall; Pain

    MAUDE report 8566432 ↗

Other shoulder prosthesis, reverse configuration devices

All shoulder prosthesis, reverse configuration devices →

Sources and updates

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