Optetrak 234-02-03Recalls & reported problems
Exactech, Inc. · Class 2 · Implant
All models of Optetrak (336)
Data updated Oct 18, 2026 from official FDA records · Editorial policy
- Adverse event reports
- 8
- Deaths reported
- 0
- Injuries reported
- 8
- Recalls naming it
- 0
Summary
The FDA's MAUDE database contains 8 adverse event reports that list this exact device (DI 10885862063199), received between Feb 12, 2020 and Aug 13, 2024 — classified as 8 injuries.
The most frequently reported specific device problem is “Loosening of Implant Not Related to Bone-Ingrowth” (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.
Reports received per month
Most reported problems
Device problems
- Loosening of Implant Not Related to Bone-Ingrowth5
- Adverse Event Without Identified Device or Use Problem3
- Naturally Worn1
- Unstable1
Patient problems
- Failure of Implant5
- Appropriate Clinical Signs, Symptoms and Conditions Term/Code Not Available2
- Joint Laxity2
- Unspecified Infection2
- Insufficient Information1
- Osteolysis1
- Synovitis1
Recent adverse event reports
The 8 most recent of 8 reports, in the reporter's own words as published by the FDA.
InjuryAug 13, 2024Unstable; Naturally Worn; Loosening of Implant Not Related to Bone-Ingrowth; Unstable; Naturally Worn; Loosening of Implant Not Related to Bone-Ingrowth
IT WAS REPORTED VIA LEGAL DOCUMENTATION THAT APPROXIMATELY 134 MONTHS AFTER A LEFT TOTAL KNEE REPLACEMENT PROCEDURE, THE UNDERWENT A REVISION PROCEDURE TO ADDRESS PROSTHESIS WEAR, GROOVING AND DELAMINATION OF THE PATELLA RESULTING IN A GROSSLY LOOSE TIBIAL COMPONENT AS WELL AS LOOSENING OF THE FEMORAL COMPONENT. NO FURTHER ISSUES OR COMPLICATIONS WERE REPORTED. NO ADDITIONAL INFORMATION IS AVAILABLE.
Patient problems: Appropriate Clinical Signs, Symptoms and Conditions Term/Code Not Available; Failure of Implant; Insufficient Information; Joint Laxity; Synovitis
MAUDE report 19974155 ↗InjuryJun 12, 2024Loosening of Implant Not Related to Bone-Ingrowth; Loosening of Implant Not Related to Bone-Ingrowth
IT WAS REPORTED VIA LEGAL DOCUMENTATION THAT APPROXIMATELY 109 MONTHS AFTER A LEFT TOTAL KNEE REPLACEMENT PROCEDURE, THE PATIENT UNDERWENT A REVISION PROCEDURE TO ADDRESS PROSTHESIS WEAR, BONE LOSS, LOOSENING OF TIBIAL AND FEMORAL COMPONENTS. POST OPERATIVE DIAGNOSIS NOTED WEAR OF THE IMPLANT. NO FURTHER ISSUES OR COMPLICATIONS WERE REPORTED. NO ADDITIONAL INFORMATION IS AVAILABLE.
Patient problems: Appropriate Clinical Signs, Symptoms and Conditions Term/Code Not Available; Failure of Implant; Joint Laxity
MAUDE report 19523835 ↗InjuryDec 23, 2021Loosening of Implant Not Related to Bone-Ingrowth; Loosening of Implant Not Related to Bone-Ingrowth
AS REPORTED BY THE EXACTECH KNEE REPLACEMENT STUDY, APPROXIMATELY THREE YEARS POST TKA, THE (B)(6) FEMALE PATIENT EXPERIENCED PAIN AND FUNCTIONAL LIMITATION OF THE LEFT KNEE WITH INFLAMMATORY CHANGES IN SURGICAL WOUND, RADIOGRAPHY EVIDENCE LOOSENING OF TIBIAL AND FEMORAL COMPONENT, ORDERS ARE GIVEN IN FIRST TIME WITH SPACER AND CULTURE TAKING. THERE IS NO FURTHER INFORMATION FOUND REGARDING TREATMENT OR A REVISION. THE EVENT IS POSSIBLY RELATED TO THE DEVICE AND TO THE PROCEDURE.
Patient problems: Failure of Implant
MAUDE report 13081981 ↗InjuryOct 30, 2020Adverse Event Without Identified Device or Use Problem; Adverse Event Without Identified Device or Use Problem
IT WAS REPORTED THAT A PATIENT EXPERIENCED A LEFT KNEE REVISION SURGERY ON (B)(6) 2012, DUE TO OSTEOLYSIS. INITIAL SURGERY DATE WAS (B)(6) 2011. NO ADDITIONAL INFORMATION ABOUT THE EVENT OR PATIENT HAS BEEN PROVIDED.
Patient problems: Osteolysis
MAUDE report 10760054 ↗InjuryOct 19, 2020Adverse Event Without Identified Device or Use Problem; Adverse Event Without Identified Device or Use Problem
IT WAS REPORTED THAT A PATIENT EXPERIENCED A LEFT KNEE REVISION SURGERY ON (B)(6) 2010, DUE TO INFECTION. INITIAL SURGERY DATE WAS (B)(6) 2008. NO ADDITIONAL INFORMATION ABOUT THE EVENT OR PATIENT HAS BEEN PROVIDED.
Patient problems: Unspecified Infection
MAUDE report 10702462 ↗InjuryOct 12, 2020Adverse Event Without Identified Device or Use Problem; Adverse Event Without Identified Device or Use Problem
IT WAS REPORTED THAT A PATIENT EXPERIENCED A LEFT KNEE REVISION SURGERY ON (B)(6) 2008, DUE TO INFECTION. INITIAL SURGERY DATE WAS (B)(6) 2008. NO ADDITIONAL INFORMATION ABOUT THE EVENT OR PATIENT HAS BEEN PROVIDED.
Patient problems: Unspecified Infection
MAUDE report 10661608 ↗InjuryApr 30, 2020Loosening of Implant Not Related to Bone-Ingrowth; Loosening of Implant Not Related to Bone-Ingrowth
INITIAL IMPLANT: (B)(6) 2014. LEFT KNEE REVISION DATE: (B)(6) 2019, HOSPITAL: UNKNOWN, SURGEON: UNKNOWN AS REPORTED, APPROXIMATELY 5 YEARS POSTOP THE INITIAL IMPLANT, A PATIENT EXPERIENCED A LEFT KNEE DEVICE FAILURE AND WAS DEFECTIVE BECAUSE OF ASEPTIC LOOSENING OF THE FEMORAL AND TIBIAL COMPONENTS, SUBSTANTIAL AND DEFECTIVE POLYETHYLENE WEAR, INCLUDING PARTICULATE DEBRIS OF THE PLASTIC POLYETHYLENE INSERT FOUND THROUGHOUT THE KNEE AREA, POLYETHYLENE WEAR RESULTING IN LOOSENING OF THE DEVICE AROUND THE WORN POLYETHYLENE INSERT AREA. NO OTHER INFORMATION HAS BEEN RECEIVED.
Patient problems: Failure of Implant
MAUDE report 10013699 ↗InjuryFeb 12, 2020Loosening of Implant Not Related to Bone-Ingrowth; Loosening of Implant Not Related to Bone-Ingrowth
AS REPORTED BY THE EXACTECH KNEE REPLACEMENT STUDY, THE (B)(6) Y/O FEMALE PATIENT WAS INITIALLY IMPLANTED ON (B)(6) 2016. THE PATIENT EXPERIENCED AN LEFT ASEPTIC TIBIAL LOOSENING. PATIENT WEIGHS (B)(6) LBS. PATIENT WITH CLINICAL AND RADIOLOGICAL SIGNS COMPATIBLE WITH ASEPTIC LOOSENING OF THE TIBIAL COMPONENT, IS TAKEN TO REVIEW THE TIBIAL COMPONENT OF LEFT RTR, ON (B)(6) 2020, THE FEMORAL COMPONENT IS STABLE IS NOT REVIEWED, PROCEDURE WITHOUT COMPLICATIONS, DISCHARGED ON (B)(6) 2020. THE EVENT IS NOT RELATED TO THE DEVICE BUT POSSIBLY RELATED TO THE PROCEDURE. DEVICES NOT RETURNING. ALL AVAILABLE INFORMATION RECEIVED AT THIS TIME.
Patient problems: Failure of Implant
MAUDE report 9700049 ↗
Other Prosthesis, Knee, Patellofemorotibial, Semi-Constrained, Cemented, Polymer/Metal/Polymer devices
- ATTUNE 1506-00-005Depuy (Ireland) · PROSTHESIS, KNEE, PATELLOFEMOROTIBIAL, SEMI-CONSTRAINED, CEMENTED, POLYMER/METAL/POLYMER589 reports
- ATTUNE 1506-00-004Depuy (Ireland) · PROSTHESIS, KNEE, PATELLOFEMOROTIBIAL, SEMI-CONSTRAINED, CEMENTED, POLYMER/METAL/POLYMER580 reports
- JOURNEY 74012812Smith & Nephew, Inc. · PROSTHESIS, KNEE, PATELLOFEMOROTIBIAL, SEMI-CONSTRAINED, CEMENTED, POLYMER/METAL/POLYMER502 reports
- JOURNEY 74011856Smith & Nephew, Inc. · PROSTHESIS, KNEE, PATELLOFEMOROTIBIAL, SEMI-CONSTRAINED, CEMENTED, POLYMER/METAL/POLYMER438 reports
- PERSONA™ 42-5099-094-00Zimmer, Inc. · PROSTHESIS, KNEE, PATELLOFEMOROTIBIAL, SEMI-CONSTRAINED, CEMENTED, POLYMER/METAL/POLYMER406 reports
- JOURNEY 74011857Smith & Nephew, Inc. · PROSTHESIS, KNEE, PATELLOFEMOROTIBIAL, SEMI-CONSTRAINED, CEMENTED, POLYMER/METAL/POLYMER388 reports
- ATTUNE 1506-00-007Depuy (Ireland) · PROSTHESIS, KNEE, PATELLOFEMOROTIBIAL, SEMI-CONSTRAINED, CEMENTED, POLYMER/METAL/POLYMER288 reports
- ATTUNE 1506-00-003Depuy (Ireland) · PROSTHESIS, KNEE, PATELLOFEMOROTIBIAL, SEMI-CONSTRAINED, CEMENTED, POLYMER/METAL/POLYMER271 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