|
Udi: (b)(4).The lot number was unknown.Investigation summary: according to the information received, it was reported that theatre nurses have asked for a healix awl to be re-etched.The product was returned to mitek for evaluation.Mitek then conducted visual inspection of device received provided by customer.The complaint device was received and evaluated.Visual observation revealed that the sharp tip at the distal end appears to be flattened.Also, the distal part was dull to the touch and found with scratches.The healix appeared to be slightly worn.Finally, the laser line was faded.Given that no lot number was provided, a manufacturing record evaluation (mre) review cannot be performed.If the lot number becomes available, the mre review will be performed.The possible root cause can be attributed this damage in the tip when the device might have been dropped or device was tapped against a hard surface accidentally.It is determined that the reusable instrument is worn from repeated use and servicing, this failure can be attributed to normal field wear.However, it cannot be conclusively affirmed.As per ifu- 108410 the precautions for this type of device consist to inspect the condition of the device prior to use.This device can damage, worn or bent; therefore, when this occurs it need to replace.The instrument life is generally determined by the wear or damaged from handling or surgical use.At this point in time, no corrective action is required, and no further action is warranted.However, in depuy synthes mitkek, additional complaint information monitoring for potential safety signals is conducted through complaint trending as part of post market surveillance.
|