|
Product complaint # (b)(4).(b)(4).Device not returned.If information is obtained that was not available for the initial report, a follow-up report will be filed as appropriate.Attempts have been made to retrieve the device.To date the device has not been returned.If the device or further details are received at a later date a supplemental medwatch will be sent.Additional information was requested and the following was obtained: there is no problem with the patient's condition.The following information was requested, but unavailable: please provide lot number.No further information is available.
|
|
Product complaint # (b)(4).Date sent to the fda: 09/29/2021 this report is being submitted pursuant to the provisions of 21 cfr, part 803.This report may be based on information which has not been investigated or verified prior to the required reporting date.This report does not reflect a conclusion by ethicon inc., or its employees that the report constitutes an admission that the product, ethicon, 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 report, a follow-up report will be filed as appropriate.Additional information: h6, d9, h3 h3 evaluation: h3 investigation summary: two suture needles, labeled as (b)(4), were submitted for fractographic evaluation.The components were identified as product code z507g.It was requested to assess the fracture mode of the failures.A fracture was observed at the tip of the needle.One side of the needle was received, the mating fracture surface was not provided for this evaluation.A scanning electron microscope was used to examine the fracture surfaces and surrounding area of the needle.The fracture surfaces were examined in multiple locations to determine the fracture mode.The evaluation of (b)(4) revealed the fracture was composed of microvoid coalescence, which is evidence of a ductile fracture mode.Mechanical damage observed coincidental to the fracture provides additional evidence that the failure was induced by mechanical deformation leading to ductile overload.This was a ductile fracture.The manufacturing records could not be reviewed as the batch number is unknown.The evidence of this examination indicates that the breakage occurred at the tip of the needle during use due to tensile overload.There is no evidence of any material flaw or defect that would cause premature failure.In order to avoid this kind of damage grasp the needle in an area one-third (1/3) to one-half (1/2) of the distance from the attachment end to the point.The needle breakage was confirmed.
|