|
|
| Model Number |
270120 |
| Medical Device Problem Code |
Break (1069)
|
| Health Effect - Clinical Code |
No Clinical Signs, Symptoms or Conditions (4582)
|
| Date of Event |
12/02/2021
|
|
Type of Reportable Event
|
Malfunction
|
|
Additional Manufacturer Narrative
|
|
If information is obtained that was not available for the initial medwatch, a follow-up medwatch will be filed as appropriate.(b)(4).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.
|
| |
|
Event or Problem Description
|
|
It was reported by the sales rep that during an unknown procedure on (b)(6) 2021, it was observed that the top jaw on the grasper-grabber device broke off inside the patient.Another like device was used to grab the broken piece out and to complete the procedure with a two-minute delay.There were no adverse patient consequences nor surgical delay reported.No additional information was provided.
|
| |
|
Additional Manufacturer Narrative
|
|
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: h4: the device manufacture date was reported as unknown on the initial report; and has been updated accordingly.Investigation summary: the device was received and evaluated.Visual observations reveals that the upper jaw is broken, the movement of the closing handle was tested, it performed as intended.As a potential cause cannot be associated to manufacturing, therefore a manufacturing record evaluation is not required.As part of depuy synthes mitek quality process all devices are manufactured, inspected, and released to approved specifications.According with the visual inspection and the functional test result, this complaint can be confirmed.The possible root cause can be attributed to hard and continuous use, since this is a reusable device, the constant manipulation between surgeries and sterilization process can lead to a broken jaw.As per ifu 107066; end of useful instrument life is generally determined by wear or damage from handling or surgical use.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.H10 correction narrative: d4: the lot number has been updated to reflect the correct information.Therefore, udi: (b)(4).
|
| |
|
Additional Manufacturer Narrative
|
|
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.
|
| |
|
Search Alerts/Recalls
|
|
|