Catalog Number AES-50SL |
Device Problem
Material Fragmentation (1261)
|
Patient Problem
Foreign Body In Patient (2687)
|
Event Date 12/26/2023 |
Event Type
Injury
|
Manufacturer Narrative
|
The device is not expected to be returned for evaluation and review.However, the complaint investigation is not complete at this time.A supplemental and final report will be filed following the completion of the complaint investigation.We will continue to monitor for trends through the complaint system to assure patient safety.
|
|
Event Description
|
A sales representative reported on behalf of a customer that the aes-50sl, arthroscopic energy 50 degree probe with suction 18 cm device was being used during a hip arthroscopy surgery on (b)(6) 2023, and ¿the face of the electrode broke while it was being used.The surgeon try to removed the tip but it was not possible.After they check it they decided to keep into the patient.¿.The procedure was completed with ¿another edge probe¿ and with a delay of 10 minutes.There was no report of further medical intervention or extended hospitalization for the patient.This report is being raised on the basis of injury due to fragmentation with retained foreign body.
|
|
Event Description
|
A sales representative reported on behalf of a customer that the aes-50sl, arthroscopic energy 50 degree probe with suction 18 cm device was being used during a hip arthroscopy surgery on (b)(6) 2023, and "the face of the electrode broke while it was being used.The surgeon try to removed the tip but it was not possible.After they check it they decided to keep into the patient." the procedure was completed with "another edge probe" and with a delay of 10 minutes.There was no report of further medical intervention or extended hospitalization for the patient.This report is being raised on the basis of injury due to fragmentation with retained foreign body.
|
|
Manufacturer Narrative
|
Reported event ¿electrode broke while it was being used¿ was confirmed.The device will not be returned for evaluation, but photographic evidence has been provided.Root cause cannot be determined, however, based upon photos; a possible cause of this event could be excessive force.The manufacturing documents from the device history record have been reviewed with special attention to the manufacturing and inspection of the product.The product released for distribution was found to have met all specifications prior to shipment.This is the only complaint for this lot number and failure mode within the past two years.(b)(4).Per the instructions for use, the user is advised to not use the probe for mechanical displacement of tissue, damage to the probe may occur.We will continue to monitor for trends through the complaint system to assure patient safety.
|
|
Search Alerts/Recalls
|