Skip to content

Optetrak 200-51-09Recalls & reported problems

Exactech, Inc. · Class 2 · Implant

All models of Optetrak (336)

Data updated Oct 18, 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 10885862040879), received between May 18, 2023 and May 21, 2023 — classified as 2 injuries.

The most frequently reported specific device problem is “Naturally Worn” (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 18, 2026.

Recalls naming this device

  1. Aug 30, 2021Class IIOpen, Classified

    Inserts were packaged in vacuum bags that lacked an additional oxygen barrier layer.

    Z-0019-2022 · Root cause: Process control · Recall details · FDA record ↗

Most reported problems

Device problems

  • Naturally Worn2

Patient problems

  • Failure of Implant2
  • Insufficient Information2

Recent adverse event reports

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

  • InjuryMay 21, 2023Naturally Worn; Naturally Worn

    DURING THE WEEK OF APRIL 17-25, REPRESENTATIVES OF EXACTECH, INC. AND EXACTECH SPAIN CONDUCTED AN IN PERSON SITE VISIT WITH (B)(6) HOSPITAL. AS A RESULT OF THAT SITE VISIT AND AT EXACTECH'S REQUEST, THE HOSPITAL PROVIDED A RETROSPECTIVE EXCEL LISTING OF REVISION RELATED TO POLYETHYLENE WEAR THAT HAVE BEEN PERFORMED SINCE 2010. THESE CASES HAVE NOT PREVIOUSLY BEEN REPORTED TO EXACTECH AS COMPLAINTS. THIS PATIENT (B)(6) WAS IMPLANTED WITH A 200-51-09-INSERTO TIB CR 1D, 9MM, SERIAL NUMBER: (B)(6) ON (B)(6) 2013. THE INSERT WAS MANUFACTURED ON (B)(6) 2011 AND WAS PACKAGED IN A VACUUM BAG WITH NO EVOH. THE INSERT WAS MANUFACTURED ON 16-DEC-2011 AND WAS 1.4 YEARS SHELF AGE AT THE TIME OF IMPLANT. APPROXIMATELY TEN YEARS POST IMPLANTATION, THE PATIENT IS PENDING REVISION FOR WEAR OF THE POLYETHYLENE. NO ADDITIONAL DETAILS ARE AVAILABLE AT THIS TIME.

    Patient problems: Failure of Implant; Insufficient Information

    MAUDE report 16971074 ↗
  • InjuryMay 18, 2023Naturally Worn; Naturally Worn

    DURING THE WEEK OF APRIL 17-25, REPRESENTATIVES OF EXACTECH, INC. AND EXACTECH SPAIN CONDUCTED AN INPERSON SITE VISIT WITH UBARMIN HOSPITAL. AS A RESULT OF THAT SITE VISIT AND AT EXACTECH'S REQUEST, THE HOSPITAL PROVIDED A RETROSPECTIVE EXCEL LISTING OF REVISION RELATED TO POLYETHYLENE WEAR THAT HAVE BEEN PERFORMED SINCE 2010. THESE CASES HAVE NOT PREVIOUSLY BEEN REPORTED TO EXACTECH AS COMPLAINTS. THIS PATIENT (207863) WAS IMPLANTED WITH A 200-51-09-INSERTO TIB CR 1D, 9MM, SERIAL NUMBER (B)(6) ON (B)(6) 2015. THE INSERT WAS MANUFACTURED ON (B)(6) 2013 AND WAS PACKAGED IN A VACUUM BAG WITH NO EVOH. THE INSERT WAS MANUFACTURED ON (B)(6) 2013 AND WAS 1.3880903490759753 YEARS SHELF AGE AT THE TIME OF IMPLANT. ON (B)(6) 2017, APPROXIMATELY 2.0 YEARS POST IMPLANTATION, THE PATIENT UNDERWENT REVISION FOR WEAR OF THE POLYETHYLENE. NO ADDITIONAL DETAILS ARE AVAILABLE AT THIS TIME.

    Patient problems: Failure of Implant; Insufficient Information

    MAUDE report 16953116 ↗

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