LUXOR 48250240Recalls & reported problems
Stryker Corporation · ARM POST · Class 1
Data updated Oct 18, 2026 from official FDA records · Editorial policy
- Adverse event reports
- 12
- Deaths reported
- 0
- Injuries reported
- 1
- Recalls naming it
- 0
Summary
The FDA's MAUDE database contains 12 adverse event reports that list this exact device (DI 07613327266177), received between Sep 5, 2017 and Feb 22, 2021 — classified as 1 injury, 11 malfunctions.
The most frequently reported specific device problem is “Mechanical Problem” (5 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 18, 2026.
Most reported problems
Device problems
- Mechanical Problem5
- Detachment of Device or Device Component4
- Break2
- Device Slipped2
- Mechanical Jam2
- Accessory Incompatible1
- Component Missing1
- Device Dislodged or Dislocated1
Patient problems
- No Known Impact Or Consequence To Patient7
- Injury2
- No Clinical Signs, Symptoms or Conditions2
- No Consequences Or Impact To Patient2
- Failure of Implant1
- No Patient Involvement1
Recent adverse event reports
The 12 most recent of 12 reports, in the reporter's own words as published by the FDA.
MalfunctionFeb 22, 2021Fracture; Mechanical Jam; Fracture; Mechanical Jam
IT WAS REPORTED THAT A LUXOR ARM POST 'WOULD NOT CLAMP ONTO THE BED RAILING TIGHTLY ENOUGH' OUTSIDE THE OPERATING ROOM. THERE WERE NO ADVERSE CONSEQUENCES TO THE PATIENT. THE PROCEDURE WAS COMPLETED SUCCESSFULLY WITHOUT SURGICAL DELAY.
Patient problems: No Clinical Signs, Symptoms or Conditions
MAUDE report 11362630 ↗MalfunctionJul 23, 2020Material Separation; Detachment of Device or Device Component; Material Separation; Detachment of Device or Device Component
IT WAS REPORTED THAT THE 'TIGHTENING BAR COMPLETELY FELL OUT OF THE HINGE JOINT' ON A LUXOR ARM POST INTRA-OPERATIVELY. THERE WERE NO ADVERSE CONSEQUENCES TO THE PATIENT. THE PROCEDURE WAS COMPLETED SUCCESSFULLY WITHOUT SURGICAL DELAY USING AN ALTERNATIVE DEVICE.
Patient problems: No Clinical Signs, Symptoms or Conditions; No Consequences Or Impact To Patient
MAUDE report 10316986 ↗MalfunctionJul 23, 2020Detachment of Device or Device Component; Mechanical Jam; Detachment of Device or Device Component; Mechanical Jam
IT WAS REPORTED THAT DURING PRE-OPERATIVE PREPARATION A LUXOR ARM POST 'WILL NOT TIGHTEN DOWN TO HOLD THE RETRACTOR ARM'. THERE WERE NO ADVERSE CONSEQUENCES TO THE PATIENT. AN ALTERNATIVE INSTRUMENT WAS USED TO COMPLETE THE PROCEDURE SUCCESSFULLY WITHOUT SURGICAL DELAY.
Patient problems: No Patient Involvement
MAUDE report 10316849 ↗MalfunctionMar 3, 2020Detachment of Device or Device Component; Detachment of Device or Device Component
IT WAS REPORTED THAT A LUXOR ARM POST SECURING MECHANISM DISSENGAGED INTRA-OPERATIVELY. THERE WERE NO ADVERSE CONSEQUENCES TO THE PATIENT.
Patient problems: No Consequences Or Impact To Patient
MAUDE report 9780257 ↗MalfunctionJul 19, 2018Detachment of Device or Device Component
IT WAS REPORTED THAT THE PIN IN THE ARM HAS FALLEN OUT WHEN TIGHTENING TO THE BED. NO ADVERSE CONSEQUENCES TO THE PATIENT HAS BEEN REPORTED.
Patient problems: No Known Impact Or Consequence To Patient
MAUDE report 7703742 ↗MalfunctionApr 24, 2018Device Dislodged or Dislocated; Component Missing; Device Dislodged or Dislocated
IT WAS REPORTED THAT THE ARM POST WAS NO ATTACHING TO THE BED DURING A PROCEDURE. ANOTHER PAN WITH A BACK UP ARM POST WAS USED TO COMPLETE THE PROCEDURE. THERE ARE NO REPORTS OF ADVERSE CONSEQUENCES TO THE PATIENT.
Patient problems: No Known Impact Or Consequence To Patient
MAUDE report 7455570 ↗MalfunctionFeb 16, 2018Mechanical Problem; Device Slipped; Mechanical Problem
IT WAS REPORTED THAT THE RETRACTOR ARM POST WOULD NOT TIGHTEN TO THE BED IN THE OPERATING ROOM. A BACK UP ARM POST WAS ALSO SLIPPING WHEN TRYING TO TIGHTEN AND EVENTUALLY FAILED AS WELL. THE PROCEDURE WAS COMPLETED SUCCESSFULLY WITH A THIRD POST. THERE WAS NO DELAY IN SURGERY OR ADVERSE CONSEQUENCES TO THE PATIENT.
Patient problems: No Known Impact Or Consequence To Patient
MAUDE report 7278671 ↗MalfunctionFeb 16, 2018Accessory Incompatible; Mechanical Problem; Device Slipped; Mechanical Problem
IT WAS REPORTED THAT THE RETRACTOR ARM POST WOULD NOT TIGHTEN TO THE BED IN THE OPERATING ROOM. A BACK UP ARM POST WAS ALSO SLIPPING WHEN TRYING TO TIGHTEN AND EVENTUALLY FAILED AS WELL. THE PROCEDURE WAS COMPLETED SUCCESSFULLY WITH A THIRD POST. THERE WAS NO DELAY IN SURGERY OR ADVERSE CONSEQUENCES TO THE PATIENT.
Patient problems: No Known Impact Or Consequence To Patient
MAUDE report 7278058 ↗MalfunctionNov 15, 2017Break
IT WAS REPORTED THAT THE POST FOR TUBES BROKE.
Patient problems: No Known Impact Or Consequence To Patient
MAUDE report 7033254 ↗MalfunctionNov 15, 2017Break; Mechanical Problem; Mechanical Problem
IT WAS REPORTED THAT THE POST FOR TUBES BROKE.
Patient problems: No Known Impact Or Consequence To Patient
MAUDE report 7033251 ↗MalfunctionSep 5, 2017Mechanical Problem; Loose or Intermittent Connection; Mechanical Problem
IT WAS REPORTED THAT; DURING SURGERY WHEN USING THE DECOMPRESSION TUBE POST THAT COMES IN THE SET, WHEN TIGHTENING THE PIN IT KEPT GOING THROUGH THE SPRING OF THE LOCKING MECHANISM. IT ULTIMATELY WOULDN'T TIGHTEN THE POST. TRIED A SECOND POST AND THE SAME ISSUE OCCURRED. BOTH WERE USED 50-100X EACH. THE INSTRUMENTS WEREN'T OBSERVED PRIOR TO THE SURGERY BECAUSE THEY BOTH WERE USED PREVIOUSLY SUCCESSFULLY THE DAY BEFORE THE SURGERY. NO LUBRICATION PERFORMED ON THE INSTRUMENTS BECAUSE IT WAS NOT NEEDED. THE SURGEON WAS PERFORMING AN MIS DISCECTOMY AND HAD TO OPEN THE INCISION TO USE OTHER INSTRUMENTATION TO COMPLETE THE PROCEDURE.
Patient problems: Injury; No Known Impact Or Consequence To Patient
MAUDE report 6843657 ↗InjurySep 5, 2017Mechanical Problem; Mechanical Problem; Device Operates Differently Than Expected
IT WAS REPORTED THAT; DURING SURGERY WHEN USING THE DECOMPRESSION TUBE POST THAT COMES IN THE SET, WHEN TIGHTENING THE PIN IT KEPT GOING THROUGH THE SPRING OF THE LOCKING MECHANISM. IT ULTIMATELY WOULDN'T TIGHTEN THE POST. TRIED A SECOND POST AND THE SAME ISSUE OCCURRED. BOTH WERE USED 50-100X EACH. THE INSTRUMENTS WEREN'T OBSERVED PRIOR TO THE SURGERY BECAUSE THEY BOTH WERE USED PREVIOUSLY SUCCESSFULLY THE DAY BEFORE THE SURGERY. NO LUBRICATION PERFORMED ON THE INSTRUMENTS BECAUSE IT WAS NOT NEEDED. THE SURGEON WAS PERFORMING AN MIS DISCECTOMY AND HAD TO OPEN THE INCISION TO USE OTHER INSTRUMENTATION TO COMPLETE THE PROCEDURE.
Patient problems: Failure of Implant; Injury
MAUDE report 6843611 ↗
Other ORTHOPEDIC MANUAL SURGICAL INSTRUMENT devices
- AML EXCEL 2001-42-000Depuy (Ireland) · ORTHOPEDIC MANUAL SURGICAL INSTRUMENT2,009 reports
- NA 03.010.523Synthes GmbH · ORTHOPEDIC MANUAL SURGICAL INSTRUMENT1,208 reports
- EXPRESSEW 214141Medos International Sàrl · ORTHOPEDIC MANUAL SURGICAL INSTRUMENT1,166 reports
- N/A 9560524Medtronic Sofamor Danek, Inc. · ORTHOPEDIC MANUAL SURGICAL INSTRUMENT866 reports
- INHANCE 6500-11-104Depuy (Ireland) · Orthopedic manual surgical instrument831 reports
- INHANCE 6500-11-102Depuy (Ireland) · Orthopedic manual surgical instrument567 reports
- R3 71364450Smith & Nephew, Inc. · ORTHOPEDIC MANUAL SURGICAL INSTRUMENT520 reports
- N/A 9561524Medtronic Sofamor Danek, Inc. · ORTHOPEDIC MANUAL SURGICAL INSTRUMENT494 reports
Sources and updates
- Device record: FDA GUDID, file dated Oct 13, 2026 · View this device in AccessGUDID ↗
- Adverse event reports: FDA MAUDE, file dated Oct 14, 2026 · each report above links to its original FDA record
- Recalls: FDA Medical Device Recalls, file dated Oct 16, 2026
- Page last rebuilt: Oct 18, 2026. Data downloaded through openFDA, which notes it is not validated for clinical or regulatory use.
How reports and recalls are matched · Editorial policy · Report an error on this page