Skip to content

Optetrak Logic 02-012-45-3040Recalls & reported problems

Exactech, Inc. · Class 2 · Implant

All models of Optetrak Logic (408)

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

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

Summary

The FDA's MAUDE database contains 5 adverse event reports that list this exact device (DI 10885862003973), received between Sep 16, 2019 and Aug 18, 2025 — classified as 5 injuries.

The most frequently reported specific device problem is “Loosening of Implant Not Related to Bone-Ingrowth” (4 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.

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: 1 reportsAug 2024: 0 reportsSep 2024: 0 reportsOct 2024: 0 reportsNov 2024: 0 reportsDec 2024: 1 reportsJan 2025: 0 reportsFeb 2025: 0 reportsMar 2025: 1 reportsApr 2025: 0 reportsMay 2025: 0 reportsJun 2025: 0 reportsJul 2025: 0 reportsAug 2025: 1 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-Ingrowth4
  • Adverse Event Without Identified Device or Use Problem1
  • Appropriate Device Problem Term/Code Not Available1
  • Unstable1

Patient problems

  • Discomfort2
  • Joint Laxity2
  • Joint effusion2
  • Osteolysis2
  • Pain2
  • Ambulation or Postural Difficulties1
  • Appropriate Clinical Signs, Symptoms and Conditions Term/Code Not Available1
  • Balance Problems1

Recent adverse event reports

The 5 most recent of 5 reports, in the reporter's own words as published by the FDA.

  • InjuryAug 18, 2025Loosening of Implant Not Related to Bone-Ingrowth; Loosening of Implant Not Related to Bone-Ingrowth

    IT WAS REPORTED THAT THE PATIENT UNDERWENT AN INITIAL TOTAL KNEE REPLACEMENT ON THE RIGHT SIDE. SUBSEQUENTLY, THE PATIENT EXPERIENCED STIFFNESS, PAIN, OSTEOLYSIS, FEMORAL AND TIBIAL IMPLANT LOOSENING, AND DISSATISFACTION WITH THEIR TOTAL KNEE REPLACEMENT. AS A RESULT, APPROXIMATELY TEN YEARS AND ONE-MONTH POST-SURGERY, THE PATIENT UNDERWENT A REVISION. PATIENT WAS REVISED TO COMPETITOR'S DEVICES. PATIENT WAS LAST KNOWN TO BE IN STABLE CONDITION FOLLOWING THE EVENT. NO FURTHER IMPACT TO THE PATIENT WAS REPORTED. THE PRODUCTS ARE NOT AVAILABLE FOR RETURN. NO ADDITIONAL INFORMATION IS AVAILABLE AT THIS TIME. THIS IS REPORT 1 OF 3 FOR THIS EVENT/PATIENT.

    Patient problems: Osteolysis; Pain

    MAUDE report 22829311 ↗
  • InjuryMar 3, 2025Loosening of Implant Not Related to Bone-Ingrowth; Loosening of Implant Not Related to Bone-Ingrowth

    IT WAS REPORTED THAT APPROXIMATELY 70 MONTHS AFTER A RIGHT TOTAL KNEE REPLACEMENT PROCEDURE, THE PATIENT UNDERWENT A REVISION PROCEDURE TO ADDRESS LOOSENING, AMBULATION DIFFICULTIES, BALANCE PROBLEMS, DISCOMFORT, OSTEOLYSIS, PAIN AND SYNOVITIS. REVISION SURGERY OPERATIVE NOTES WERE PROVIDED. PATIENT LEFT THE OPERATING ROOM IN STABLE CONDITION. NO FURTHER ISSUES OR COMPLICATIONS WERE REPORTED. NO ADDITIONAL INFORMATION IS AVAILABLE.

    Patient problems: Ambulation or Postural Difficulties; Appropriate Clinical Signs, Symptoms and Conditions Term/Code Not Available; Balance Problems; Discomfort; Osteolysis; Pain; Synovitis

    MAUDE report 21506604 ↗
  • InjuryDec 8, 2024Loosening of Implant Not Related to Bone-Ingrowth; Loosening of Implant Not Related to Bone-Ingrowth

    AS REPORTED, APPROXIMATELY 6 YEARS AND 4 MONTHS POST THE INITIAL LEFT TOTAL KNEE ARTHROPLASTY, THE PATIENT HAS DISCOMFORT AND PERIODS OF INFLAMMATION. X-RAY SHOWED SIGNS OF LOOSENING OF THE TIBIAL COMPONENT AND DELAMINATION OF THE INSERT IN BOTH COMPARTMENTS. SLIGHT JOINT EFFUSION, SLIGHT LAXITY. THE PATIENT WAS REVISED. THE TIBIAL INSERT WAS DETERIORATED WHEN REMOVED.

    Patient problems: Discomfort; Inflammation; Joint Laxity; Joint effusion

    MAUDE report 20875377 ↗
  • InjuryJul 22, 2024Unstable; Loosening of Implant Not Related to Bone-Ingrowth; Unstable; Loosening of Implant Not Related to Bone-Ingrowth

    IT WAS REPORTED THAT A MALE PATIENT, INITIAL LEFT KNEE IMPLANTED ON (B)(6) 2019, UNDERWENT A REVISION PROCEDURE ON (B)(6) 2024, APPROXIMATELY 4 YEARS 8 MONTHS POST THE INITIAL PROCEDURE. THE PATIENT WAS SUFFERING FROM LAXITY, INSTABILITY, AND CHRONIC HYDRARTHROSIS. MACROSCOPIC PE GRANULOMA INDICATED. THE REPORT STATED THE PATIENT HAD ASEPTIC TIBIAL AND FEMORAL LOOSENING 5 YEARS AFTER THE INITIAL PLACEMENT. THE PE WAS CHANGED. NO SURGICAL DELAYS OR DEVICE BREAKAGES WERE REPORTED. NO X-RAYS WERE PROVIDED. THE DEVICE RETURN STATUS FOR ANALYSIS IS UNKNOWN CURRENTLY. THEY HAVE BEEN REQUESTED. NO DEVICE IMAGES WERE PROVIDED. NO FURTHER INFORMATION.

    Patient problems: Granuloma; Joint Laxity; Joint effusion

    MAUDE report 19801708 ↗
  • InjurySep 16, 2019Adverse Event Without Identified Device or Use Problem; Appropriate Device Problem Term/Code Not Available; Adverse Event Without Identified Device or Use Problem

    INDEX SURGERY: (B)(6) 2014. PENDING REVISION OF THE LEFT KNEE - REASON NOT REPORTED.

    Patient problems: No Information

    MAUDE report 9069828 ↗

Other Prosthesis, Knee, Patellofemorotibial, Semi-Constrained, Cemented, Polymer/Metal/Polymer devices

All Prosthesis, Knee, Patellofemorotibial, Semi-Constrained, Cemented, Polymer/Metal/Polymer devices →

Sources and updates

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