|
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.: 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.
|
|
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.The expiration and manufacture dates were reported as unknown on the initial report; and have been updated accordingly.Therefore, udi: (b)(4).Investigation summary according to the information provided, it was reported that the threader tab of the 4.75mm healix advance knotless peek anchor broke during loading of the sutures.The complaint device was received and evaluated.Upon visual inspection, it could be observed that the anchor was in good condition and was not broken.The inserter shaft had no structural anomalies.The handle¿s cover was removed to verify the sutures integrity and no anomalies were found.The threader tab was not returned.A manufacturing record evaluation was performed for the finished device 7l47995 number, and no non-conformances were identified.As part of depuy synthes mitek quality process all devices are manufactured, inspected, and released to approved specifications.According with the visual inspection performed, this complaint cannot be confirmed.Since the broken piece was not returned, we cannot perform a pertinent inspection to determine the root cause for the breakage.At this point in time, no corrective action is required, and no further action is warranted.However, depuy synthes mitek will continue to monitor additional complaint information for potential safety signals through complaint trending as part of post market surveillance.
|