|
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 the surgery of acl reconstruction, could not left the anchor securely in the bone hole.The complaint device was received and evaluated.Upon visual inspection of the screw, it could be observed that the device has a normal shape, the threads are not distorted and the hexagonal hole is in good shape.A manufacturing record evaluation was performed for the finished device 8l09572 number, and no non-conformances were identified.According with the visual inspection result, this complaint can be confirmed.A possible root cause can be attributed to procedural variables, such handling of the device or product interaction during procedure; the interference screw needs to be attached to its proper driver, however, the customer did not provide a photo of the driver that was used in this procedure, also, poor bone quality can be a contributor for the failure reported.As per the instructions for use: it is mandatory to completely seat the milagro interference screw onto the correct driver for proper implant delivery.At this point in time, no corrective action is required, and no further action is warranted.However, depuy synthes mitek will continue to monitor additional complaint information for potential safety signals through complaint trending as part of post market surveillance.Device history lot: there were no non conformances regarding this lot.
|
|
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 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.
|