Device was used for treatment, not diagnosis.There was no reported patient involvement associated with the complained event.Device is an instrument and is not implanted/explanted.(b)(6).This complaint was reassessed for reportability upon completion of the investigation on august 25, 2016.Device is not distributed in the united states, but is similar to device marketed in the usa.A product investigation was performed for the subject device.The investigation revealed that the welding joint between the handle and the inner shaft broke and therefore the plastic handle separated from the shaft.The handle is intact-- nothing has broken off.The nature of the visible hammering marks and striations on the striking head, and at the front side of the handle, show that the instrument has been subjected to excessive use.The current technique guide recommends ¿insert the pfna blade to the stop by applying gentle blows with the hammer¿.The device history record review shows that the device fully met fully specifications at the time of manufacturing in january 26, 2010 and there were no issues that would contribute to this complaint condition.The complaint condition is confirmed.The root cause was determined to be excessive, long term use.If information is obtained that was not available for the initial medwatch, a follow-up medwatch will be filed as appropriate.
|