Skip to content

Optetrak 232-02-03Recalls & reported problems

Exactech, Inc. · Class 2 · Implant

All models of Optetrak (336)

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

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

Summary

The FDA's MAUDE database contains 2 adverse event reports that list this exact device (DI 10885862063038), received between Nov 4, 2020 and Jan 28, 2025 — classified as 2 injuries.

The most frequently reported specific device problem is “Loosening of Implant Not Related to Bone-Ingrowth” (1 report).

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: 1 reportsFeb 2025: 0 reportsMar 2025: 0 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

  • Loosening of Implant Not Related to Bone-Ingrowth1
  • Naturally Worn1
  • Unstable1

Patient problems

  • Appropriate Clinical Signs, Symptoms and Conditions Term/Code Not Available1
  • Failure of Implant1
  • Joint Laxity1
  • Metal Related Pathology1
  • Osteolysis1
  • Pain1
  • Scar Tissue1

Recent adverse event reports

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

  • InjuryJan 28, 2025Unstable; Naturally Worn; Unstable; Naturally Worn

    IT WAS REPORTED THAT APPROXIMATELY 101 MONTHS AFTER A LEFT TOTAL KNEE REPLACEMENT PROCEDURE, THE PATIENT UNDERWENT A REVISION PROCEDURE TO ADDRESS PROSTHESIS WEAR, METALLOSIS, PAIN, JOINT LAXITY, JOINT INSTABILITY, OSTEOLYSIS ON THE MEDIAL FEMORAL CONDYLE, AND TIBIAL BONE LOSS. REVISION SURGERY OPERATIVE NOTES WERE PROVIDED. PATIENT LEFT THE OPERATING ROOM IN STABLE CONDITION. POST OPERATIVE DIAGNOSIS NOTED WEAR OF THE IMPLANT. NO FURTHER ISSUES OR COMPLICATIONS WERE REPORTED. NO ADDITIONAL INFORMATION IS AVAILABLE." X-RAY: NO. OPERATIVE NOTES: YES.

    Patient problems: Appropriate Clinical Signs, Symptoms and Conditions Term/Code Not Available; Joint Laxity; Metal Related Pathology; Osteolysis; Pain; Scar Tissue

    MAUDE report 21252537 ↗
  • InjuryNov 4, 2020Loosening of Implant Not Related to Bone-Ingrowth; Loosening of Implant Not Related to Bone-Ingrowth

    AS REPORTED, APPROXIMATELY 5 YEARS POST-OP THE INITIAL KNEE IMPLANT, A MALE PATIENT, AGE AND WEIGHT UNKNOWN, ALLEGES THAT HIS IMPLANTED DEVICE FAILED AND CAUSED HIM BODILY INJURY, SOME OF WHICH MAY BE PERMANENT IN NATURE, SUFFERED PAIN, EMOTIONAL DISTRESS, AND REQUIRED ADDITIONAL SURGICAL PROCEDURES TO REMOVE THE DEFECTIVE DEVICE. IT IS UNKNOWN IF THE PATIENT HAD ALL DEVICES REMOVED OR IF EXACTECH DEVICES WERE THE REVISION DEVICES. NO OTHER INFORMATION AVAILABLE AT THIS TIME.

    Patient problems: Failure of Implant

    MAUDE report 10786885 ↗

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