.png){kind=link}
- Published
- Updated
Examination after explantation can mislead if separated from the reason for removal and clinical context. Handling and changes introduced during removal can also affect findings. Plan the assessment without substituting research needs for clinical decisions.
Define the assessment
Link reason for removal, duration of use, relevant clinical observations and the examination question. Separate care priorities from research sample collection. The authorised team should assess ethics, consent and local conditions for additional tissue or images; research interests should not automatically expand a clinical intervention.
Worked example
For example, a scratch is found on an implant after removal. It is unclear whether it arose during use, removal or transport. The team compares procedure records and photographs with the handling chain. Rather than immediately classifying product failure, it explains possible times of occurrence and the limits of the examination.
Practical checks
- Securely match sample identity to the device identifier and participant study code.
- Assess how cleaning, storage and transport may affect the planned technical examination.
- Disclose removal damage and missing clinical context in the examination report.
Decision and limitations
Acceptance requires an explanation of examination conditions as well as sample identity. Findings should not become causal claims beyond the available clinical evidence. Relevant teams should follow unresolved findings and safety questions; merely storing an archive photograph does not complete the assessment.
Frequently asked questions
- Can every removed device be sent for research?
- Assess consent, institutional processes, biological hazards and local requirements rather than assuming automatic transfer.
- Does surface damage establish device failure?
- Not alone. Consider effects introduced during use, removal, transport and preparation together.