A facility reported that during a craniotomy procedure, the disposable perforator (id 261221) did not perform as expected when making the first burr hole.While making the first burr hole, the perforator did not stop when through the skull, and a result, it caused a tear in the patient's dura.The tear was repaired with dural replacement and suture, and a 20-30 minutes delayed was reported.The facility confirmed that an electric stryker pi drive drill was used with the perforator, and the perforator clicked in place in the drill.It is unknown if the recommended spring tests was being performed between each burr hole.The patient was discharged and stable.
|
Updated fields: d4, d9, g3, g6, h2, h3, h4, h6, h10.The disposable perforator (id 261221) was returned for evaluation.Device history record (dhr) - there is no indication that the production process may have contributed to this complaint.All test results passed procedural specifications.Failure analysis - the perforator unit was inspected using the unaided eye.Unit was heavily soiled with organic material, but no other anomalies were observed.The "ifu" testing procedure was performed once the debris from the perforator was removed.Once the debris was no longer keeping the drill from moving, the spring test was performed as intended.A functional testing was performed using the same protocol it underwent at finished goods testing prior to release.The unit was found to perform as intended and fulfilled the acceptance criteria.The complaint could not be verified through failure analysis.The root cause is undetermined and was unable to be confirmed in the complaint evaluation.Product was received for analysis and the investigation could not confirm the complaint.
|