510(k) Report

510(k) · Cleared

Recalled · Class II · 2022

Patient Specific Distal Femoral

K140898510(k) SpecialCleared Jan 20, 2015287-day reviewClass II21 CFR 888.3510Recalls 2

Data to Oct 25, 2026 (FDA decisions) Oct 12, 2026 (recalls) Sep 30, 2026 (MAUDE) refreshed weekly, last Nov 3, 2026

Stanmore Implants Worldwide, Ltd. · KRO Prosthesis, Knee, Femorotibial, Constrained, Cemented, Metal/Polymer

Cleared on Jan 20, 2015 as substantially equivalent to K121029 (Stanmore Implants Worldwide, Ltd., 2012) and 2 other predicates after a 287-day review. Its family tree reaches back 4 generations to 1996. It has been recalled 2 times.

Decided
Jan 20, 2015
Review
287 days
Class
Class II
Product code
KRO
Recalls
2
Predicates
3

Its longest line of descent runs back 4 generations to K945028 (1996). 12 ancestors in all. No later device cites it as a predicate yet.

Other ancestors, by year cleared 2012: 2 other ancestors2011: 1 other ancestor2002: 2 other ancestors2000: 1 other ancestor1996: 1 other ancestor2001: 1 other ancestorK945028 · Finn Knee System · Biomet, Inc. · 1996K051570 · Avl Hinge Knee System · Biomet, Inc. · 2005K120992 · Mets Smiles Total Knee Replacement · Stanmore Implants Worldwide, Ltd. · 2012 · recalledK133152 · JTS Extendible Distal Femoral Implant · Stanmore Implants Worldwide, Ltd. · 2014 · recalled19952000200520102015
Other ancestors, by generation 1 generation back: 2 other ancestors2 generations back: 4 other ancestors3 generations back: 1 other ancestor4 generations back: 1 other ancestor K133152 · JTS Extendible Distal Femoral Implant · Stanmore Implants Worldwide, Ltd. · 2014 · recalledK120992 · Mets Smiles Total Knee Replacement · Stanmore Implants Worldwide, Ltd. · 2012 · recalledK051570 · Avl Hinge Knee System · Biomet, Inc. · 2005K945028 · Finn Knee System · Biomet, Inc. · 19960
  1. Root · 4 generations backK945028 Finn Knee SystemBiomet, Inc. · 1996
  2. 3 generations backK051570 Avl Hinge Knee SystemBiomet, Inc. · 2005
  3. 2 generations backK120992 Mets Smiles Total Knee ReplacementStanmore Implants Worldwide, Ltd. · 2012 · Recalled
  4. 1 generation backK133152 JTS Extendible Distal Femoral ImplantStanmore Implants Worldwide, Ltd. · 2014 · Recalled
  5. This deviceK140898 Patient Specific Distal FemoralStanmore Implants Worldwide, Ltd. · 2015
View FIG. 1 as a table

Line of descent and top descendants

GenerationNumberDeviceApplicantDecidedRecalls
−4K945028Finn Knee SystemBiomet, Inc.1996—
−3K051570Avl Hinge Knee SystemBiomet, Inc.2005—
−2K120992Mets Smiles Total Knee ReplacementStanmore Implants Worldwide, Ltd.20126
−1K133152JTS Extendible Distal Femoral ImplantStanmore Implants Worldwide, Ltd.20141
0 (this device)K140898Patient Specific Distal FemoralStanmore Implants Worldwide, Ltd.2015—

Other ancestors by year cleared

Year clearedDevicesWith a Class I recall
199610
200010
200110
200220
201110
201220
FIG. 1 — Lineage of K140898, 1996–2015Source: FDA 510(k) summaries, read by 510(k) Report · How lineage is built

Get the monthly Device Review Tracker

Notable FDA decisions, review times and new Class I recalls. See an issue.

Sources: FDA 510(k) database (decision fields), the FDA summary (predicates and indications), FDA recall and enforcement reports, and MAUDE; processed by 510(k) Report. Verify on FDA.gov · Methodology and accuracy.

Planning a device in KRO? A 510(k) Report weighs predicate choices, recall history and review times for a new device like this one.

Top candidate predicates for a new KRO device

  1. #1 K251665 Triathlon® Hinge Knee Systemscore 19.0 · 12 generations · no Class I recall
  2. #2 Held for the reportin the report
  3. #3 Held for the reportin the report
Get a 510(k) Report

What was it cleared against? (3)

Devices the submitter claimed this one is substantially equivalent to (*), and reference devices cited for a specific test or feature (†), as written in the FDA summary.

TypeNumberDeviceApplicantDecidedRecalls
*K121029Mets Modular Distal Femur
Summary page 5
…Distal Femur and its components are for cemented use only. Predicate Device(s) The predicate devices are the METS® Modular Distal Femur, cleared on September 19, 2012 (K121029), the JTS® Extendible Distal Femoral Implant cleared on March 22, 2011(K092138) and the JTS® Extendible Distal Femoral Implant cl…
Stanmore Implants Worldwide, Ltd.2012—
*K092138JTS Extendeable Implant
Summary page 5
…) The predicate devices are the METS® Modular Distal Femur, cleared on September 19, 2012 (K121029), the JTS® Extendible Distal Femoral Implant cleared on March 22, 2011(K092138) and the JTS® Extendible Distal Femoral Implant cleared on January 22, 2014 (K133152). Technological Characteristics The Patient…
Stanmore Implants Worldwide, Ltd.20111
*K133152JTS Extendible Distal Femoral Implant
Summary page 5
…2012 (K121029), the JTS® Extendible Distal Femoral Implant cleared on March 22, 2011(K092138) and the JTS® Extendible Distal Femoral Implant cleared on January 22, 2014 (K133152). Technological Characteristics The Patient Specific Distal Femur is a patient-specific implant system that is used to replace d…
Stanmore Implants Worldwide, Ltd.20141

Also cleared against K121029: 1 other device →

What descends from it?

No later submission names this one as a predicate yet.

Has anything in its family been recalled? (0 Class I)

Recalls of this device

DateClassRecallRoot causeReason
Aug 24, 2022Class IIZ-1778-2022Under Investigation by firmA MK4 Tibial Bearing was supplied with the intention to mate with the Tibial Metal Casing in-situ. However, the device in-situ was a MK3 Tibial Metal Casing. The supplied MK4 tibial bearing was not exchangeable for the MK3 tibial bearing.…
Jul 4, 2017Class IIZ-3104-2017Labeling designThree (3) complaints were identified in which the potential for utilization of the JTS Grower Drive in the incorrect orientation in relation to the limb entry point of the device, together with the potential to select incorrect settings…

No ancestor or descendant has a Class I recall.

What does this lineage say?

  • The line of descent spans 19 years and passes through 2 companies; a new generation was cleared every 7.1 years on median.
  • 6 of the 12 ancestors have a recall of any class.
  • 1 other device also cites its predicate K121029.

How does its category compare?

All KRO devices

KRO Prosthesis, Knee, Femorotibial, Constrained, Cemented, Metal/Polymer: FDA decisions, review times, recalls and adverse event reports over 20 years. 2015, this device’s year, is highlighted.

FDA decisions per year · KRO

3in 2025

2007: 12008: 32009: 32010: 12011: 22012: 22013: 32014: 22015: 62016: 32017: 12019: 32020: 12021: 32022: 12023: 42024: 32025: 32026 (partial year): 1
2007high 6 (2015) · low 0 (2018)2026

2026 to Oct 25, outlined.

Median 510(k) review, days · KRO

56in 2025

2008: 126 days median2009: 86 days median2013: 189 days median2015: 113 days median2016: 148 days median2019: 244 days median2021: 57 days median2023: 148 days median2024: 87 days median2025: 56 days median
2007high 244 (2019) · low 56 (2025)2026

Receipt to decision; years with fewer than 3 clearances left blank.

Recalls per year · KRO

14so far in 2026, the most since 2007

2007: 12008: 32009: 82011: 12012: 12013: 22015: 12016: 52017: 42018: 12021: 12025: 12026 (partial year): 14
2007high 14 (2026) · low 0 (2010)2026

Class I (0 since 2007) Class II/III not classified

Adverse event reports per year · KRO

915in 2025

2007: 372008: 442009: 662010: 1102011: 1192012: 1732013: 1942014: 4062015: 3332016: 3692017: 5432018: 6142019: 7592020: 7492021: 7702022: 8922023: 7462024: 8552025: 915
2007high 915 (2025) · low 37 (2007)2025

MAUDE reports naming product code KRO, not matched to any one device; reports are not rates.

View these four charts as a table
YearDecisionsMedian 510(k) review, daysRecalls (Class I)MAUDE reports
20071—137
20083126344
2009386866
20101—0110
20112—1119
20122—1173
201331892194
20142—0406
201561131333
201631485369
20171—4543
20180—1614
201932440759
20201—0749
20213571770
20221—0892
202341480746
20243870855
20253561915
20261—14—

What is it indicated for?

The Patient Specific Distal Femur is intended for the replacement of diseased or deficient bone in the distal femur. It is indicated for: • Limb salvage procedures where radical resection and replacement of the bone is required • Painful and disabled joint resulting from avascular necrosis, osteoarthritis, rheumatoid arthritis or traumatic arthritis • Correction of varus, valgus or post traumatic deformity • Correction of revision of unsuccessful…

Read the full statement (115 words)

The Patient Specific Distal Femur is intended for the replacement of diseased or deficient bone in the distal femur. It is indicated for:

• Limb salvage procedures where radical resection and replacement of the bone is required

• Painful and disabled joint resulting from avascular necrosis, osteoarthritis, rheumatoid arthritis or traumatic arthritis

• Correction of varus, valgus or post traumatic deformity

• Correction of revision of unsuccessful osteotomy, arthrodesis, or previous joint replacement

• Ligament deficiencies

• Tumor resection

• Revision of previously failed total joint arthroplasty

• Trauma

The Patient Specific Distal Femur and its components are for single use only.

The Patient Specific Distal Femur and is components are for cemented use only.

Indications for use as stated in the FDA summary.

Cite this page

510(k) Report. “K140898: Patient Specific Distal Femoral.” Lineage record from FDA 510(k) data and the FDA summary. Updated Nov 3, 2026. Accessed Nov 5, 2026. https://510kreport.com/device/K140898

Report an extraction error

Tell us what is wrong; we check it against the FDA summary.

Are you the manufacturer?

Send a correction or an update to this page, for example a newer model or a public statement about a recall.

Record history
  • FDA decision record loaded May 2, 2026
  • Summary read Oct 13, 2026 (extraction version 9eaa42aa01ed)
  • Lineage and recalls computed Nov 3, 2026
  • Page last updated Nov 3, 2026