|
(b)(4).The device was received, the investigation is in progress, no conclusion could be drawn at the time of filing 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.
|
|
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.H10 additional narrative: d11: concomitant product added to complaint investigation summary background: 12/15/2020: updated event description: it was reported that on an unknown date, the barrel plate wouldn¿t seat over blade and both impactor cap tip broke in the process.I¿m not sure which one was at fault so i will give you the numbers for them all.Nothing was left in the patient.Ended up removing everything and using cannulated screws.The procedure was successfully completed with an unknown number of surgical delay.The patient outcome is unknown.This complaint involves five (5) devices.H3, h4, h6: device history lot part number: 338.348 lot number: 4673565 date of manufacture: 12/12/2003 place of manufacture: brandywine part expiration date: n/a (nonsterile) list of non-conformances: none device history batch null, device history review description of dhr review: no ncrs were generated during production.Review of the device history record(s) showed that there were no issues during the manufacture of the product that would contribute to this complaint action.Investigation flow: damage visual inspection: the lcp dhhs (tm) impactor cap (p/n: 338.348, lot #: 4673565) was returned and received at us cq.Upon visual inspection, it was observed that the cap was broken and the broken fragments were not returned.No other issues were observed with the returned device.Device failure/defect was identified.Dimensional inspection: the outer diameter of the impactor cap close to the broken part was measured to be within specification.Document/specification review based on the date of manufacture, the current and manufactured revision of drawings were reviewed impactor cap: 338_348, rev.D/b complaint was confirmed.The device received was broken.Hence confirming the allegation.Investigation conclusion the complaint condition was confirmed for the lcp dhhs (tm) impactor cap (p/n: 338.348, lot #: 4673565).There is no indication that a design or manufacturing issue has caused the complaint condition and hence the root cause cannot be determined.The potential cause could be due to unintended forces applied to the device.Based on the investigation findings, it has been determined that no corrective and/or preventative action is proposed.Additional monitoring for any potential safety signals will be conducted through complaint trending and other post market safety surveillance activities.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.
|