Catalog Number 03.501.080 |
Device Problem
Device Operates Differently Than Expected (2913)
|
Patient Problem
No Known Impact Or Consequence To Patient (2692)
|
Event Type
malfunction
|
Manufacturer Narrative
|
Device was used for treatment, not diagnosis.Device is an instrument and is not implanted/explanted.Without a lot number the device history records review could not be completed.The investigation could not be completed; no conclusion could be drawn, as no product was received.If information is obtained that was not available for the initial medwatch, a follow-up medwatch will be filed as appropriate.
|
|
Event Description
|
It was reported that a zipfix gun was not tightening properly.Surgeon reported that the zipfix was not getting as tight as surgeon previously experienced.This caused no alteration to the sternal closure procedure.Patient status unknown.This is report 1 of 1 for (b)(4).
|
|
Manufacturer Narrative
|
A product development investigation was performed: this complaint involve one (1) second generation instrument with the lot number 8707958.No components, screws or nuts are loose or missing on the returned device.No damages or functional issues were identified.The performed handling test by product development with the instrument with 3 implants on a sternum bone model showed no functional deficiencies in tensioning and/or cutting the implants with the instrument.The tension applied is as per the design intent.The reduced tensioning force as per the compliant description could not be replicated / confirmed.The nut component which held the tension limiting spring on the slider assembly rod is secured and fix in place.There is no functional or design related issues identified on the returned instrument.Therefore this complaint is closed by product development as invalid.Device was used for treatment, not diagnosis.If information is obtained that was not available for the initial medwatch, a follow-up medwatch will be filed as appropriate.
|
|
Manufacturer Narrative
|
Subject device has been received and is currently in the evaluation process.Dhr review ¿ manufacturing location: (b)(4).Manufacturing date: 19 november 2013.No ncr's were generated during production that would contribute to the complaint condition.The review of the device history record shows that there were no issues during the manufacture of the product that would contribute to the complaint condition.Device was used for treatment, not diagnosis.If information is obtained that was not available for the initial medwatch, a follow-up medwatch will be filed as appropriate.
|
|
Search Alerts/Recalls
|