|
If information is obtained that was not available for the initial medwatch, a follow-up medwatch will be filed as appropriate.Additional narrative: udi: (b)(4).As of this date, the device has not been returned for evaluation; therefore, the reported condition cannot be confirmed and/or duplicated.If information is obtained that was not available for the initial medwatch, a follow-up medwatch will be filed as appropriate.
|
|
It was reported by the affiliate in (b)(6) that during an ankle reconstruction surgery, a 4.5mm healix advance¿ peek anchor with dynacord¿ suture (blue, white/blue/green), with needles (mo-7) cracked and broke upon insertion when surgeon applied torque.Surgeon has pre-drilled a hole prior to insertion.To complete procedure a new anchor was opened and existing hole was dilated further with awl tap to accommodate anchor.There was a surgical delay of one minute with no patient consequences 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 mitek or its employees that the report constitutes an admission that the device, 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.Investigation summary according to the information provided, it was reported that during an ankle reconstruction a 4.5mm healix advance anchor with dynacord¿ suture (blue, white/blue/green), with needles (mo-7) cracked and broke upon insertion when surgeon applied torque.Surgeon has pre-drilled a hole prior to insertion.The complaint device is not being returned, it was discarded by the customer, therefore unavailable for a physical evaluation.However, a photo was provided.Upon visual inspection of the photo, it was observed that the anchor was cracked in the proximal part but held in place by the suture.The photo provide evidence of damage in the anchor; therefore, the complaint reported can be confirmed.As a result, we cannot determine a root cause for the reported failure, but the possible could be related when applying excessive tension from pulling suture back or with off axis insertion; however, it cannot be conclusively affirmed.Hands on analysis should provide more evidence to be able to discern a root cause.A manufacturing record evaluation was performed for the finished device lot number:4l01766, and no non-conformances were identified. at this point in time, 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.
|