Skip to content

EIT CIF cage CUI4070SRecalls & reported problems

EIT Emerging Implant Technologies GmbH · EIT CIF cage, H 7mm, 4°, S · Class 2 · Implant

All models of EIT CIF cage (6)

Data updated Oct 16, 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 04260557770306), received between Mar 28, 2025 and Mar 28, 2025 — classified as 1 injury.

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: 0 reportsJul 2024: 0 reportsAug 2024: 0 reportsSep 2024: 0 reportsOct 2024: 0 reportsNov 2024: 0 reportsDec 2024: 0 reportsJan 2025: 0 reportsFeb 2025: 0 reportsMar 2025: 1 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

  • Adverse Event Without Identified Device or Use Problem1

Patient problems

  • Nonunion/Delayed-union Bone Fracture1

Recent adverse event reports

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

  • InjuryMar 28, 2025Adverse Event Without Identified Device or Use Problem; Adverse Event Without Identified Device or Use Problem

    IT WAS REPORTED THAT ON (B)(6) 2024, THE ORIGINAL OPERATION TOOK PLACE. THE PATIENT RETURNED TO OFFICE FOR ROUTINE FOLLOW-UP AS WELL AS REVIEW OF LUMBAR SPINE FOR SURGICAL INTERVENTION. THE SCREW BACK OUT WAS NOTICED ON FOLLOW-UP X-RAYS. SURGEON DETERMINED AT THE TIME HE WOULD REMOVE THE SCREW ON THE SAME DAY THE PATIENT WAS HAVING A POSTERIOR LUMBAR FUSION COMPLETED. REVISION WAS PERFORMED. CODA 48MM PLATE WAS ORIGINALLY IMPLANTED WITH 3.5X16 SCREWS IN C7. THERE WAS BILATERAL FLANGE BREAKAGE OVER C7 SCREWS. REMOVED C7 SCREWS. BOTH SCREWS WERE BROKEN AND TIPS OF SCREWS REMAINED IN THE VERTEBRAL BODY. UPON REVIEW OF THE CONSTRUCT, THE SURGEON DETERMINED THE PLATE WAS NOT REMAINING FLUSH WITH THE VERTEBRAL BODIES WHICH INDICATED POTENTIAL MOVEMENT AT THE ADJACENT LEVELS. HE MADE THE DECISION TO REMOVE THE PLATE AND REPLACE IT WITH SKYLINE TO AVOID ADDITIONAL SCREW/PLATE BREAKAGE OF THE EXISTING CODA PLATE. SURGEON MANUALLY ATTACHED REMOVAL TOOL TO CAGE AT EACH LEVEL AND DETERMINED THERE WAS NO CAGE LOOSENING AT C4/5, C5/C6. CAGE AT C6/C7 APPEARED TO SHOW SIGNS OF NONUNION PROMPTING SURGEON TO REMOVE THE 7MM 4* CONDUIT CAGE. A NEW CONDUIT 9MM 8* PACKED WITH VIVIGEN WAS PLACED IN THE C

    Patient problems: Nonunion/Delayed-union Bone Fracture

    MAUDE report 21719124 ↗

Other Intervertebral Fusion Device With Bone Graft, Cervical devices

All Intervertebral Fusion Device With Bone Graft, Cervical devices →

Sources and updates

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