If information is obtained that was not available for the initial medwatch, a follow-up medwatch will be filed as appropriate.This report is for an unknown implant.Part and lot number are unknown.Without the specific part number; the udi number, 510-k number and manufacturing site name are unknown.Complainant part is not expected to be returned for manufacturer review/investigation.Without a lot number the device history records review could not be completed.Product was not returned.Based on the information available, it has been determined that no corrective and/or preventative action is proposed.This complaint will be accounted for and monitored via post market surveillance activities.If additional information is made available, the investigation will be updated as applicable.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.
|
This file is a review of the following journal article: xu, h., et al (2018) a new arthroscopic broström procedure for chronic lateral ankle instability.Foot & ankle orthopaedics, vol.3, pages 1 (unknown).The study emphasizes on the description of a new outside-in arthroscopic broström procedure and its results for treating patients with chronic lateral ankle instability.The patients evaluated on course of this study: 32 patients.The article describes the following procedure: anterior talofibular ligament repair.The device involved was: unknown lupine anchor.Complications described: 1 patients reported persistent (chronic) superficial peroneal nerve (spn) irritation symptom postoperatively.
|
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.Investigation summary: this complaint file was opened to document complaints derived through a journal article review.The journal article review indicated depuy mitek product failure(s).No patient name or contact information was provided, therefore no follow up can be completed at this time.Should additional information become available, this case will be re-assessed.It is unknown if complaints derived from this journal article were previously reported and documented in the depuy mitek complaint system at the time of occurrence as no product code/lot number information was provided to perform the search.With the information provided, and without the complaint device to evaluate, we cannot determine a root cause for the reported problem.Given that no lot number was provided, a manufacturing record evaluation (mre) or sterile load review cannot be performed.If the lot number becomes available, the mre review will be performed.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.
|