|
Model Number Z-ML |
Device Problems
Break (1069); Detachment Of Device Component (1104); Mechanical Problem (1384); Detachment of Device or Device Component (2907)
|
Patient Problems
Tissue Damage (2104); Injury (2348); Patient Problem/Medical Problem (2688)
|
Event Date 07/19/2017 |
Event Type
Injury
|
Manufacturer Narrative
|
The dentist did not disclose any information about the patient.This event occurred in (b)(6), but similar products are marketed in the us under k113655.
|
|
Event Description
|
On july 26, 2017, nakanishi received an e-mail from a distributor about a patient's injury with an nsk handpiece.Details are as follows.The event occurred on (b)(6) 2017.A dentist was cutting the patient's tooth using the handpiece, z-ml (serial no.(b)(4)).During the procedure, the handpiece head suddenly came off and damaged mucous membrane in the oral cavity.The dentist found a little bleeding from a minor cut in the patient's mouth and provided a hemostatic treatment to the patient.The dentist determined no other treatment for the cut was necessary.According to the dentist, there were no abnormalities or malfunctions observed with the handpiece prior to use.
|
|
Manufacturer Narrative
|
Upon receiving the device involved in the mdr event from a distributor, nakanishi conducted a failure analysis of the returned device [(b)(4)].These activities are described in more detail below.Methodology used: nakanishi examined the device history record and the repair history for the subject z-ml device [serial number (b)(4)].There were no problems observed during the manufacturing or testing noted in the dhr.There were also no repair history records since the device was shipped.Nakanishi conducted a visual inspection of the returned device and performed a manual reproducibility test.There was no problem with how to connect the handpiece with the coupling.Nakanishi then pulled the handpiece by hand from the coupling without pulling the connector ring of the coupling or without releasing the lock to see whether or not the handpiece was removed from the coupling.Nakanishi did not observe the handpiece coming off as reported by the user.Nakanishi supplied the handpiece with air with the manufacturer's recommended pressure (0.28mpa) and stopped supplying repeatedly (100 times) to replicate the reported phenomenon.Separation of the handpiece from the coupling was not observed during the test.Nakanishi conducted the same test with the maximum pressure air (0.3mpa), but no coming off was observed.Nakanishi evaluated pull strength of the handpiece by pulling the handpiece from the coupling using force specified in the specifications (100n) or greater.The handpiece did not separate from the coupling.Conclusions reached based on the investigation and analysis results: nakanishi could not identify the exact cause of the handpiece separating from the coupling because nakanishi was not able to replicate the phenomenon during testing and did not observe any abnormalities in the visual inspection.In spite of the fact that nakanishi did not identify the cause, nakanishi considers the possibility from many years of experience that the cause of the handpiece separation from the coupling was that the connector ring of the coupling was accidentally pulled in the lock release direction by external factors.Carelessness by the user causes erroneous operation leading to the report handpiece coming off.In order to prevent a recurrence of the handpiece separating from the coupling, nakanishi reported the above evaluation results to the dentist and urged the dentist to exercise caution in use of the device.
|
|
Search Alerts/Recalls
|
|
|