|
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 unknown procedure the latarjet glenoid long drill bit 3.2 drill bit broke off in patient¿s glenoid.The complaint device is not being returned, therefore unavailable for a physical evaluation.However a photo was provided.Upon visual inspection of the photo, the device does not show any structural anomalies on the shaft, when reviewing the drill, it could be observed that the distal tip is broken.Given that lot number was not provided, the manufacturing record evaluation (mre) review cannot be performed.If the lot number becomes available, the mre review will be performed.As part of depuy synthes mitek quality process all devices are manufactured, inspected, and released to approved specifications.According with the visual inspection result, this complaint can be confirmed.The possible root cause can be attributed to the constant and rough use.Since this is a reusable device, the constant manipulation between surgeries, the repeated tightening process and sterilization process can lead in damages to the tip.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.
|