• Decrease font size
  • Return font size to normal
  • Increase font size
U.S. Department of Health and Human Services

MAUDE Adverse Event Report: DEPUY MITEK LLC US ARTHROSCOPIC PUSHER/CUTTER; SUTURE CUTTER

  • Print
  • Share
  • E-mail
-
Super Search Devices@FDA
510(k) | DeNovo | Registration & Listing | Adverse Events | Recalls | PMA | HDE | Classification | Standards
CFR Title 21 | Radiation-Emitting Products | X-Ray Assembler | Medsun Reports | CLIA | TPLC
 

DEPUY MITEK LLC US ARTHROSCOPIC PUSHER/CUTTER; SUTURE CUTTER Back to Search Results
Model Number 228302
Device Problems Degraded (1153); Unintended Movement (3026)
Patient Problem No Clinical Signs, Symptoms or Conditions (4582)
Event Type  malfunction  
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 depuy mitek or its employees that the report constitutes an admission that the device, depuy 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: udi: (b)(4).The expiration date is currently unavailable.Reporter is a j&j sales representative.The device manufacture date is currently unavailable.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
It was reported by the sales rep in sweden that the arthroscopic pusher/cutter device did not cut the suture properly.According to the report, the device was loose in the screw holding the inner sleeve.There was no procedure nor patient involvement 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 depuy mitek or its employees that the report constitutes an admission that the device, depuy 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: d9, 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.
 
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 depuy mitek or its employees that the report constitutes an admission that the device, depuy 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 edwatch, a follow-up medwatch will be filed as appropriate.H10 additional narrative: investigation summary the product was returned to mitek for evaluation.Mitek then conducted visual inspection and functional test of device received.Upon visual inspection, it could be observed that the device was in used condition as expected in this type of reusables devices.The cutter tip edge was found to be dull.When performing the functional test, a sample suture was used, it was placed into the cutting hole, and the device was not able to cut the suture as intended, the screw did not show anomalies.A manufacturing record evaluation was performed for the finished device 22k01, and no non-conformances were identified.As part of depuy synthes mitek quality process all devices are manufactured, inspected, and released to approved specifications.According with the visual inspection and the functional test result, this complaint can be confirmed.The possible root cause can be attributed to the repeated and constant use of the device, since this device is reusable, the continuous use and sterilization process can cause metal fatigue leading to dull edge.Per the ifu: recommends to visually inspect the instrument and check for damage and wear; verify that all cutting edges are free of nicks and have a continuous edge; verify that moveable parts have smooth movement without excessive play; inspect that locking mechanisms fasten securely and close easily; and verify that long, thin instruments are free of bending and distortion.At this point in time, no corrective action is required, and no further action is warranted.However, depuy synthes mitek will continue to monitor additional complaint information for potential safety signals through complaint trending as part of post market surveillance.
 
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.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.H10 additional narrative: h4: the device manufacture date was unknown in the initial report and has been updated accordingly.
 
Search Alerts/Recalls

  New Search  |  Submit an Adverse Event Report

Brand Name
ARTHROSCOPIC PUSHER/CUTTER
Type of Device
SUTURE CUTTER
Manufacturer (Section D)
DEPUY MITEK LLC US
325 paramount drive
raynham MA 02767
Manufacturer (Section G)
DEPUY MITEK LLC US
325 paramount drive
raynham MA 02767
Manufacturer Contact
kate karberg
325 paramount drive
raynham, MA 02767
3035526892
MDR Report Key16639815
MDR Text Key312497330
Report Number1221934-2023-01389
Device Sequence Number1
Product Code NBH
UDI-Device Identifier10886705010172
UDI-Public10886705010172
Combination Product (y/n)N
Reporter Country CodeSW
PMA/PMN Number
EXEMPT
Number of Events Reported1
Summary Report (Y/N)N
Report Source Manufacturer
Source Type Foreign,Health Professional,User Facility,Company Representative
Reporter Occupation Other Health Care Professional
Type of Report Initial,Followup,Followup,Followup
1 Device was Involved in the Event
1 Patient was Involved in the Event
Is this an Adverse Event Report? No
Is this a Product Problem Report? Yes
Device Operator Health Professional
Device Model Number228302
Device Catalogue Number228302
Device Lot Number22K01
Was Device Available for Evaluation? Device Returned to Manufacturer
Is the Reporter a Health Professional? Yes
Initial Date Manufacturer Received 03/10/2023
Initial Date FDA Received03/29/2023
Supplement Dates Manufacturer Received04/19/2023
04/26/2023
05/16/2023
Supplement Dates FDA Received04/20/2023
04/28/2023
05/17/2023
Was Device Evaluated by Manufacturer? Yes
Date Device Manufactured08/29/2022
Is This a Reprocessed and Reused Single-Use Device? No
Patient Sequence Number1
-
-