The agent reported (piece of broken instrument was left in the patient, the dr left it in the patient.Female, 78) this event occurred during surgery, near the patient.No risk or adverse event was reported by the surgeon.The surgery was completed as intended, with no delay.The instrument was inspected prior to use and was deemed acceptable for use based on its appearance.The agent was present during surgery and was able to source a suitable replacement device.Rma examination: the instrument was not returned to djo for further examination, if at a later time the instrument is returned, an amendment will be opened to document any new information.Is a complaint investigation required? yes justification - if no investigation required: a review of 804-07-461 device history record (dhr) revealed the instrument, when released for use, met design and manufacturing requirements.There were no ncmrs associated with the production of this instrument.Complaint database review showed 5 previous complaints but there were no indications that this instrument has a design or material deficiency.The root cause of this complaint is difficult to determine since the device was not returned for evaluation.It is likely attributable to damage incurred from prolonged use and through misuse or rough handling which surgical instruments are subjected to.This is not an event associated with a product failure, malfunction, or issue.
|