Catalog Number 03.812.307 |
Device Problem
Break (1069)
|
Patient Problem
No Known Impact Or Consequence To Patient (2692)
|
Event Date 11/24/2015 |
Event Type
malfunction
|
Manufacturer Narrative
|
Device is an instrument and is not implanted or explanted.The complainant part is expected to be returned for manufacturer review/investigation, but has yet to be received.(b)(6).Investigation could not be completed and no conclusion could be drawn as no device was returned.Device history record review: manufacturing location: (b)(4) - manufacturing date: august 25, 2011.No non-conformance reports were generated during production that would contribute to the complaint condition.The review of the device history record shows that there were no issues during the manufacture of the product that would contribute to the complaint condition.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.
|
|
Event Description
|
Device report from synthes (b)(4) reports an event in (b)(6) as follows: it was reported that three (3) transforaminal posterior atraumatic lumbar (t-pal) trial spacers (7mm, 8mm, and 9mm) broke during a surgical procedure on november 24, 2015.The procedure was completed with a twenty (20) minute delay.No reported harm to the patient, whose postoperative outcome was reported as "ok." this report is 2 of 3 for (b)(4).
|
|
Manufacturer Narrative
|
The device was received, the investigation could not be completed, and no conclusion could be drawn, as product is entering the complaint system.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.
|
|
Manufacturer Narrative
|
A manufacturing evaluation was completed: the ball at the coupling is broken off.The complaint article was analyzed by a microscopic investigation.Afterwards there was an evaluation of the fracture surface with a scanning electron microscopic with the help of an energy-dispersive x-ray spectroscopy performed.In addition there was also a hardening test performed.The macroscopic evaluation has shown clear evidence of mechanical damages.The investigation of the scanning electron microscope has shown that it is a distinct mixed fracture.This fracture is a clear evidence of a triaxle stress state which has led to this damage.The smudged areas of the fracture surface and the strong oxidation indicates that the break has progressed step by step.It is likely that during the application an initial crack has formed which has led to the failure of the instrument.The hardening test has shown no deviation to the specification.A product development evaluation was completed: three parts received.Parts show normal wear and tear.Proximal tips are broken off and have also been received at investigation site.It could not be determined what lead to the failure of material.It is likely that hammering in both directions (push and pull) lead to the failure.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
|