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.H10 additional narrative: investigation summary: according to the information provided, it was reported that during an knee arthroscopy and meniscus repair ten truespan meniscal repair system peek 12 degree did not work, the system was out of order every time, all 10 pistol hand grips seem to be broken.The complaint device was received and evaluated; visual inspection reveals that there are no anomalies or structural damage on the outside of the device.We could confirm the presence of both implants; however, the first plate was already deployed.The integrity of the sutures was verified, they were found to be in good structural conditions.The functional test was performed to the second plate, the needle was introduced into the rubber meniscal sample.The red trigger was depressed, and the plate was deployed as intended, no anomalies could be found.Due to the first implant was found to be deployed, this complaint can be confirmed.A possible root cause can be attributed to the handling of the device, the operator probably did not introduce the needle to the appropriate depth resulting in a non desired deployment, however this cannot be conclusively determined.A manufacturing record evaluation was performed for the finished device [6l60683] number, 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.
|
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.D9, h3, h6: the actual device has been returned and is currently pending evaluation.Once reliability engineering evaluates the device, a supplemental medwatch report will be sent accordingly.If information is obtained that was not available for the initial medwatch, a follow-up medwatch will be filed as appropriate.
|