|
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.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 medwatch, a follow-up medwatch will be filed as appropriate.Investigation summary: according to the information provided, it was reported that during an acl surgery the part broke off into the patient's knee.After approximately 40 minutes the part was successfully removed from the patient's knee at no consequence.The complaint device was received and evaluated.Upon visual inspection, it was found that the device's shaft is broken.The device's shaft has friction marks.As a potential cause cannot be associated to manufacturing, therefore a manufacturing record evaluation is not required.As part of depuy synthese 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 this issue can be attributed to procedural variables, such handling of the device or product interaction during procedure, the device may become stuck due to a hard bone surface at the moment of drilling, therefore, the shaft broke, however, this cannot be conclusively determined.At this point in time, no corrective action is required, and no further action is warranted.However, depuy synthese mitek will continue to monitor additional complaint information for potential safety signals through complaint trending as part of post market surveillance.
|