Catalog Number 03.812.310 |
Device Problem
Mechanical Jam (2983)
|
Patient Problem
Sedation (2368)
|
Event Date 05/21/2015 |
Event Type
Injury
|
Event Description
|
Device report from synthes (b)(4) reports an event in (b)(6) as follows: it was reported that two (2) devices used to insert the tpal were blocked in the close position and could not be removed during the surgical procedure.This resulted in the breakage of the implant at the proximal part.The other inserter was also blocked in the close position with the trial.There was a reported delay of sixty (60) minutes.This report is 4 of 7 for (b)(4).
|
|
Manufacturer Narrative
|
Additional patient information: patient height reported as (b)(6).Device is an instrument/template and is not implanted or explanted.Device is not distributed in the united states, but is similar to a device marketed in the us.Subject device has been received; no conclusions could be drawn as the device is entering the complaint system.Without a lot number, the device history record review could not be requested.Device 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
|
Manufacturing investigation evaluation: received one (1) article of t-pal small trial implant size 10 for manufacturing investigation.The part was received un-mounted, respectively not assembled with associated parts.On the shaft surface, there are some spots visible.During the manufacturing investigation, a functional test was performed.The article passed the functional test.Also, during a second test with the counterparts of this complaint a malfunction with the t-pal small trial implant was not observed.A malfunction of the recess has not been found.The cause for the malfunction is likely jamming, seizing on thread m16x1.5-lh, likely due to being used without proper lubrication.Device 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
|
Device 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
|
A product development investigation was performed ¿ two instruments received: a) assembled applicator (inner shaft, outer shaft and knob) containing broken part of peek implant b) assembled applicator (outer shaft and knob) containing trial implant small 10.The two received instruments were both jammed.With a force of around 3nm the thread could be released.Parts show normal wear and tear.The inner shaft (03.812.003) and the trial spacer (03.812.310) seem to be slightly bent.Assembly without inner shaft or trial implant does not produce resistance in thread.Only when the inner shaft or trial implant is inserted, the jamming occurs.The jamming happens just at the point where the security ring needs to be pushed down to release the retaining blocks.One of the two outer shafts shows corrosion.So does the inner shaft and the trial.This might have caused the jamming.Corrosion is addressed separately in the corrosion evaluation.The design of the parts is adequate.Parts shall be evaluated by production with a special focus on the thread of 03.812.001/004 and recess on 03.812.003/010.Dhr review ¿ manufacturing site: (b)(4).Manufacturing date: 17.Feb.2015.No ncrs were generated during production.Review of the device history record showed that there were no issues during the manufacture of the product that would contribute to this 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
|