|
Catalog Number 214140 |
Device Problem
Bent (1059)
|
Patient Problem
No Consequences Or Impact To Patient (2199)
|
Event Date 05/03/2018 |
Event Type
malfunction
|
Manufacturer Narrative
|
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.Udi: (b)(4).
|
|
Event Description
|
It was reported via phone by the sales rep that during a hip procedure, the bottom jaw on the customer's expressew iii w/o hook seemed to be bent and made it difficult for the needle to retrack.The doctor was able to complete the procedure with the device with no patient consequences or delays.
|
|
Manufacturer Narrative
|
Product complaint # (b)(4).Depuy synthes is submitting this report pursuant to the provisions of 21 cfr, part 803.This report may be based on information which depuy synthes has not been able to investigate or verify prior to the required reporting date.This report does not reflect a conclusion by dfa.Depuy synthes or its employees that the report constitutes an admission that the device, depuy synthes, or its employees caused or contributed to the potential event described in this report.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.Udi: (b)(4).
|
|
Event Description
|
Additional information received on 5/20/2018 stated that the issue was detected intra-op and it doesn't result in any surgical delay.The procedure was able to be completed and there was no patient impact.
|
|
Manufacturer Narrative
|
Product complaint#: (b)(4).Depuy synthes is submitting this report pursuant to the provisions of 21 cfr, part 803.This report may be based on information which depuy synthes has not been able to investigate or verify prior to the required reporting date.This report does not reflect a conclusion by fda, depuy synthes or its employees that the report constitutes an admission that the device, depuy synthes, or its employees caused or contributed to the potential event described in this report.Device was used for treatment, not diagnosis.Additional narrative: if information is obtained that was not available for the initial medwatch, a follow-up medwatch will be filed as appropriate.Evaluation statement: the complaint device was received and inspected.The complaint can be confirmed.It was observed that the lower jaw of the device was bent inward such that the needle hole was closed slightly.This type of damage may have been caused by the device being dropped on the jaw/ mishandled.However, given the information provided we cannot discern a definitive root cause for the reported failure.A device history record (dhr) review has been conducted to determine if there were any internal processing issues which would have contributed to the nature of the product complaint.Our results indicate that this batch of product was processed without incident; therefore, there is no evidence of manufacturing anomalies on the paperwork reviewed.At this point, no corrective action is required and no further action is warranted.However, depuy synthes mitek will continue to track any related complaints within this device family as a means of monitoring the extent with which this complaint is observed in the field.Udi: (b)(4).
|
|
Manufacturer Narrative
|
Product complaint # (b)(4).Depuy synthes is submitting this report pursuant to the provisions of 21 cfr, part 803.This report may be based on information which depuy synthes has not been able to investigate or verify prior to the required reporting date.This report does not reflect a conclusion by fda, depuy synthes or its employees that the report constitutes an admission that the device, depuy synthes, or its employees caused or contributed to the potential event described in this report.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.Corrected data: it was determined that the previously submitted medwatch was a duplicate report of (b)(4).
|
|
Search Alerts/Recalls
|
|
|