Catalog Number 351.920 |
Device Problem
Malposition of Device (2616)
|
Patient Problem
Foreign Body In Patient (2687)
|
Event Date 09/24/2015 |
Event Type
Injury
|
Manufacturer Narrative
|
(b)(6).Device is an instrument and is not implanted/explanted.Complainant part is expected to be returned for manufacturer review/investigation, but has yet to be received.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.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.
|
|
Event Description
|
Device report from synthes (b)(4) reports an event in (b)(6) as follows: it was reported the physician manually started the medullary cavity, with 6mm reamer.When he removed the reamer, he saw that part of the reamer was in the medullary canal.There was no delay to the surgery time.A part of the reamer was left in the patient's bone.This is report 1 of 1 for (b)(4).
|
|
Manufacturer Narrative
|
(b)(6).Manufacturing location: (b)(4).Manufacturing date: 12november2013.No non-conformance reports were generated during production.Review of the device history record(s) showed that there were no issues during the manufacture of the product that would contribute to this complaint condition.A manufacturing evaluation was completed: the product was returned in a packaging different from the original packaging.The laser etching was good readable.Traces of excessive bending are visible in the region of the broken area of the instrument.A device history record review was performed for the affected lot, no abnormalities or deviations were detected, which could lead to the complaint failure.The instrument was manufactured in november 2013 and the instrument was in use for roundabout two years.The instrument shows traces of excessive bending in the region of the broken reamer.Probably the instrument was applied with strong force and it bent and the breakage was caused.Based on this the complaint is rated as confirmed but not as valid from the point of view of the manufacturing site.No manufacturing related issue was identified and/or confirmed.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
|
|