|
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 by sales rep via complaint submission tool that during a shoulder repair, metallic deposit was released by the omnicut 4.2 (used w/ micro handpiece) just after activating the blade (before any contact with the tissue or the bone).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, fragments metallic were observed.The complaint reported was confirmed.The photo do not provide enough evidence to determine root cause.Hands on analysis should provide the evidence necessary to confirm the root cause.The possible root cause for the reported failure can be attributed to excessive friction between the inner and outer blade.However, this cannot be conclusive determined. given that lot number was not provided, a manufacturing record evaluation (mre) review cannot be performed.If the lot number becomes available, the mre review will be performed. 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.
|