|
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: d9, h3, h6: 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 medatch, a follow-up medwatch will be filed as appropriate.H10 additional narrative: investigation summary = > according to the information received, it was reported that during a rotator cuff repair the tip of the 5.5/6.5 healix advance awl is dull, it looks flatten.The product was returned to mitek for evaluation.Mitek then conducted visual inspection and functional test of device received.Visual observation confirms that the sharp tip at the distal end appears to be flattened, confirming this failure.Also, the distal part was dull to the touch and found with scratches.The healix appeared to be slightly worn.Finally, the laser line is still somewhat visible for correct insertion depth.As a potential cause cannot be associated to manufacturing, therefore a manufacturing record evaluation is not required.The possible route 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.Lot number on the device indicates this device is 2 years old and hence this failure can be attributed to normal field wear.As a potential cause cannot be associated to manufacturing, therefore a manufacturing record evaluation is not required.As per ifu- 108410 the precautions for this type of device consist of 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.As part of depuy synthes mitek quality process all devices are manufactured, inspected, and released to approved specifications.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.
|