• Decrease font size
  • Return font size to normal
  • Increase font size
U.S. Department of Health and Human Services

MAUDE Adverse Event Report: STRYKER TRAUMA KIEL HUMERAL NAIL T2 HUMERUS Ø7X280 MM; ROD, FIXATION, INTRAMEDULLARY AND ACCESSORIES

  • Print
  • Share
  • E-mail
-
Super Search Devices@FDA
510(k) | DeNovo | Registration & Listing | Adverse Events | Recalls | PMA | HDE | Classification | Standards
CFR Title 21 | Radiation-Emitting Products | X-Ray Assembler | Medsun Reports | CLIA | TPLC
 

STRYKER TRAUMA KIEL HUMERAL NAIL T2 HUMERUS Ø7X280 MM; ROD, FIXATION, INTRAMEDULLARY AND ACCESSORIES Back to Search Results
Model Number 1830-0728S
Device Problems Break (1069); Fracture (1260)
Patient Problems No Known Impact Or Consequence To Patient (2692); No Clinical Signs, Symptoms or Conditions (4582)
Event Date 07/03/2020
Event Type  malfunction  
Manufacturer Narrative
Upon completion of investigation, additional information will be provided in a supplemental report.
 
Event Description
Pharmacist reported that: "the operating block placed this morning a humeral nail t2, ref# 1830-0728s.During installation the nail (ref# 1830-0728s ¿ lot k295422ra) broke on the extremity.".
 
Manufacturer Narrative
The reported event could be confirmed, since the device was returned for evaluation and matches with the alleged event.The device inspection revealed the following: the received device was broken at the proximal end, both pegs were teared off from the base.The improper insertion signs were evident at the internal thread of the nail which shows that the target device was not assembled properly.The fracture surfaces show that the nail was broken due to excessive torsional force applied.Functional inspection: due to the nature of the returned device, a functional inspection was not possible.Dimensional inspection: due to the nature of the returned device, a dimensional inspection was not possible.However, during manufacturing, functionality test and dimensional inspection were done according to specifications.During the inspection, all devices met the specifications.Based on the investigation the root cause was attributed to a user related issue.The failure was cause due to improper handling i.E.After improper alignment in between nail and target device excessive torsional force was applied.As a collateral finding it was verified during the dhr review [device history records] that the implant in question for the provided lot code was already expired more than 3 years ago although the device packaging was evidently marked with an id-label which clearly presents an expiry date 2017-04.A review of the device history for the reported lot did not indicate any abnormalities.No corrective actions are required at this time.A review of the labeling did not indicate any abnormalities.No indications of material, manufacturing or design related problems were found during the investigation.
 
Event Description
Pharmacist reported that: "the operating block placed this morning a humeral nail t2, ref# (b)(4).During installation the nail (ref# (b)(4) ¿ lot k295422ra) broke on the extremity.".
 
Manufacturer Narrative
Please note corrections to sections d4 lot# and expiration date and h4.The reported event could be confirmed, since the device was returned for evaluation and matches with the alleged event.The device inspection revealed the following: visual inspection: the received device was broken at the proximal end, both pegs were teared off from the base.The improper insertion signs were evident at the internal thread of the nail which shows that the target device was not assembled properly.The fracture surfaces show that the nail was broken due to excessive torsional force applied.Functional inspection: due to the nature of the returned device, a functional inspection was not possible.Dimensional inspection: due to the nature of the returned device, a dimensional inspection was not possible.However, during manufacturing, functionality test and dimensional inspection were done according to specifications.During the inspection, all devices met the specifications.Based on the investigation the root cause was attributed to a user related issue.The failure was cause due to improper handling i.E.After improper alignment in between nail and target device excessive torsional force was applied.A review of the device history for the reported lot did not indicate any abnormalities.No corrective actions are required at this time.A review of the labeling did not indicate any abnormalities.No indications of material, manufacturing or design related problems were found during the investigation.
 
Event Description
Pharmacist reported that: "the operating block placed this morning a humeral nail t2, ref#: (b)(4).During installation the nail ((b)(4) ¿ lot k295422ra) broke on the extremity.".
 
Search Alerts/Recalls

  New Search  |  Submit an Adverse Event Report

Brand Name
HUMERAL NAIL T2 HUMERUS Ø7X280 MM
Type of Device
ROD, FIXATION, INTRAMEDULLARY AND ACCESSORIES
Manufacturer (Section D)
STRYKER TRAUMA KIEL
prof. kuentscher-strasse 1-5
schoenkirchen/kiel D-242 32
GM  D-24232
Manufacturer (Section G)
STRYKER TRAUMA KIEL
prof. kuentscher-strasse 1-5
schoenkirchen/kiel D-242 32
GM   D-24232
Manufacturer Contact
anna jusinski
325 corporate drive
mahwah, NJ 07430
2018315000
MDR Report Key10347443
MDR Text Key203170310
Report Number0009610622-2020-00412
Device Sequence Number1
Product Code HSB
UDI-Device Identifier04546540201348
UDI-Public04546540201348
Combination Product (y/n)N
Reporter Country CodeFR
PMA/PMN Number
K032523
Number of Events Reported1
Summary Report (Y/N)N
Report Source Manufacturer
Source Type Health Professional
Reporter Occupation Pharmacist
Type of Report Initial,Followup,Followup
Report Date 09/25/2022
1 Device was Involved in the Event
1 Patient was Involved in the Event
Date FDA Received07/30/2020
Is this an Adverse Event Report? No
Is this a Product Problem Report? Yes
Device Operator Health Professional
Device Expiration Date08/31/2022
Device Model Number1830-0728S
Device Catalogue Number18300728S
Device Lot NumberK295422RA
Was Device Available for Evaluation? Device Returned to Manufacturer
Date Returned to Manufacturer07/22/2020
Is the Reporter a Health Professional? Yes
Date Manufacturer Received09/01/2022
Was Device Evaluated by Manufacturer? Yes
Date Device Manufactured09/19/2017
Is the Device Single Use? Yes
Is This a Reprocessed and Reused Single-Use Device? No
Type of Device Usage Initial
Patient Sequence Number1
-
-