Skip to content

Trident 69-2854Recalls & reported problems

Howmedica Osteonics Corp. · Constrained Acetabular Insert · Class 2 · Implant

All models of Trident (160)

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

1 open recall names this device. See the recall details and contact the manufacturer or your healthcare provider.

Adverse event reports
2
Deaths reported
0
Injuries reported
2
Recalls naming it
1

Summary

The FDA's MAUDE database contains 2 adverse event reports that list this exact device (DI 07613327025491), received between Aug 30, 2017 and May 6, 2020 — classified as 2 injuries.

The most frequently reported specific device problem is “Device Dislodged or Dislocated” (2 reports).

1 FDA recall record name this device's identifier, 1 still open.

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.

Recalls naming this device

  1. Jul 30, 2026Open, Classified

    Affected devices were manufactured with Ultra High Molecular Weight Polyethylene (UHMWPE) raw material aged in excess of five years. Product has the potential for elevated levels of oxidation, which may result in increased wear, leading to hazards such as excessive wear debris, material fragments, fractured device, or disassociated device. Potential harms include revision surgery, pain, and inflammation.

    Z-3197-2026 · Root cause: Process change control · Recall details · FDA record ↗

Most reported problems

Device problems

  • Device Dislodged or Dislocated2

Patient problems

  • Injury2

Recent adverse event reports

The 2 most recent of 2 reports, in the reporter's own words as published by the FDA.

  • InjuryMay 6, 2020Device Dislodged or Dislocated; Device Dislodged or Dislocated

    IT WAS REPORTED THAT THE PATIENT'S RIGHT HIP WAS REVISED. AS REPORTED BY REP: "THIS PATIENT HAD A CONSTRAINED LINER CEMENTED IN . THE PATIENT MOVED INCORRECTLY AND ACTUALLY DISLOCATED THE BIPOLAR COMPONENT FROM THE CONSTRAINED LINER. WE REMOVED THE CONSTRAINED LINER AND CEMENTED IN A NEW ONE WITH A MULTIHOLE CUP."

    Patient problems: Injury

    MAUDE report 10028838 ↗
  • InjuryAug 30, 2017Device Dislodged or Dislocated; Device Dislodged or Dislocated

    ON (B)(6) A STRYKER CAGE AND CEMENTED ALL POLY CONSTRAINED WERE IMPLANTED INTO A PATIENTS RIGHT HIP. ON (B)(6) THE PATIENT WAS REVISED BECAUSE THE INNER BIPOLAR HAD DISENGAGED FROM THE LARGER PART OF THE CONSTRAINED. ANOTHER CONSTRAINED WAS CEMENTED IN.

    Patient problems: Injury

    MAUDE report 6830413 ↗

Other Prosthesis, hip, constrained, cemented or uncemented, metal/polymer devices

All Prosthesis, hip, constrained, cemented or uncemented, metal/polymer devices →

Sources and updates

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