|
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 the device has been evaluated, a supplemental medwatch report will be sent accordingly.
|
|
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 appropriat.H10 additional narrative: investigation summary : according to the information received, it was reported that during an unknown procedure while using a fms curved aggressive blade plus 4.2mm 5pk there was release of metallic deposit by activating the blade.The complaint device was returned for evaluation.Upon visual inspection of the device, the inner and outer shaft were separated and inspected for any visual defects that may contribute to the complaint condition.The device has friction and striation marks on the surface of the distal end of the inner shaft; also, the outer shaft shows marks of wear near the distal part.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 for reported failure can be attributed to blade wear and degradation, as per ifu 110849; excessive side loading may result in blade wear and degradation.Adequate suction is recommended to reduce wear and degradation of the device.Besides, a hand piece used in this procedure where the blade is assembled was not received for evaluation, potential ways to reduce shedding is to ensure all hand pieces are properly serviced and maintained.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.
|