|
Model Number 228152 |
Device Problems
Patient-Device Incompatibility (2682); Device-Device Incompatibility (2919); Mechanical Jam (2983)
|
Patient Problem
No Consequences Or Impact To Patient (2199)
|
Event Date 10/12/2020 |
Event Type
malfunction
|
Manufacturer Narrative
|
If information is obtained that was not available for the initial medwatch, a follow-up medwatch will be filed as appropriate.Additional narrative: udi: (b)(4).To date the device has not been returned.If the device or further details are received at a later date a supplemental medwatch will be sent.
|
|
Event Description
|
This is report 2 of 2 for the same event.It was reported by the sales rep that during an unknown procedure on (b)(6) 2020, it was observed that two of the truespan meniscal repair system peek 24 degree anchor devices got stuck and misfired the implant.The handle for both devices got jammed to a point that the spring coil did not retract back.Another device was used to complete the procedure.No patient consequences or surgical delay reported.No additional information was provided.
|
|
Manufacturer Narrative
|
This report is being submitted in pursuant to the provisions of 21 cfr, part 803.This report may be based on information which has not been able to investigate or verify prior to the required reporting date.This report does not reflect a conclusion by mitek or its employees that the report constitutes an admission that the device, mitek, or its employees caused or contributed to the potential event described in this report.If information is obtained that was not available for the initial medwatch, a follow-up medwatch will be filed as appropriate.H10 additional narrative: investigation summary: according to the information provided, it was reported that during a acl recon.W/ meniscal repair procedure two of the truespan meniscal repair system peek 24 degree got stuck and misfire the implant, the handle for both devices got jammed to a point that the spring coil did not retract back.Two devices were received and evaluated.Visual observations reveal that the implants were not within the needle shafts assembly.The first device, was received without physical damages.On the second device, the silicone sleeve was damaged as it was broken in the distal part.The functional test didn't performed due to the implants were not within the needle shafts assembly.The device was opened to review the internal components.As result, the spring was found in optimal conditions.The complaint cannot be confirmed.In this moment and with the information provided we cannot discern a root cause for the reported failure.A manufacturing record evaluation was performed for the finished device lot number: 6l63284 & 6l35832, and no non-conformances were identified.At this point in time, no corrective action is required, and no further action is warranted.However, depuy synthes mitek will continue to track any related complaints within this device family as a means of monitoring the extent with which this complaint is observed in the field.
|
|
Manufacturer Narrative
|
This report is being submitted in pursuant to the provisions of 21 cfr, part 803.This report may be based on information which has not been able to investigate or verify prior to the required reporting date.This report does not reflect a conclusion by mitek or its employees that the report constitutes an admission that the device, mitek, or its employees caused or contributed to the potential event described in this report.If information is obtained that was not available for the initial medwatch, a follow-up medwatch will be filed as appropriate.D10, h3, h6: the actual device has been returned and is currently pending evaluation.Once reliability engineering evaluates the device, a supplemental medwatch report will be sent accordingly.If information is obtained that was not available for the initial medwatch, a follow-up medwatch will be filed as appropriate.
|
|
Search Alerts/Recalls
|
|
|