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.Device was used for treatment, not diagnosis.H10 additional narrative: udi: (b)(4).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 submitted accordingly.
|
It was reported by that during a knee arthroscopy w/ meniscal repair procedure, it was observed that the cutting mechanism on the arthroscopic pusher/cutter device was not deploying properly and thus, was not cutting the suture.Another like device was used to complete the procedure.There were no adverse consequences to the patient reported nor surgical delay reported.No additional information was provided.
|
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.Device was used for treatment, not diagnosis.Investigation summary : the products were returned to mitek for evaluation.Mitek then conducted visual inspection and functional test of the devices received.Upon visual inspection, it was observed that the device shows noticeable wear marks, as expected in this type of reusables devices.The inner shaft was disassembled and it was verified that the inner tip had the edge dull.To test its functionality a sample suture was used, it was placed into the cutting hole, and the device was not able to cut the test suture.The observed condition was identified as an end of life indicator; damage consistent with repeated use and servicing.The lifecycle requirements of the device are event related and depend on the use and inspection of the device in clinical practice.As the device can be damaged on the first or 100th use, the device must be properly inspected prior to each surgical use.Refer to the device/country specific ifu for information related to end of life, reprocessing instructions, and inspection procedures.The overall complaint was confirmed as the observed condition of the arthro pusher/cutter.Ea would have contributed to the complained issue.Based on the investigation findings, the potential cause is traced to end of life.As per ifu: inspect devices for damage before using.End of useful instrument life is generally determined by wear or damage from handling or surgical use.Inspect instruments between uses to verify proper functioning.It has been determined, 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.Device history lot : a manufacturing record evaluation was performed for the finished device lot number 11b08, and no non-conformances were identified.
|