|
|
| Model Number |
222265 |
| Medical Device Problem Code |
Break (1069)
|
| Health Effect - Clinical Code |
No Clinical Signs, Symptoms or Conditions (4582)
|
| Date of Event |
01/12/2022
|
|
Type of Reportable Event
|
Malfunction
|
|
Additional Manufacturer Narrative
|
|
Udi: (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 customer in (b)(6) that during a rotator cuff repair surgery on (b)(6) 2022, it was observed that the 4.5 healix br anchor w/ocord anchor device broke.All the broken parts were removed.Another like device was used to complete the procedure.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: 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.
|
| |
|
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.Investigation summary: the complaint device was not returned after multiple attempts for device return, therefore unavailable for a physical evaluation.With the information provided, and without the complaint device to evaluate, we cannot determine a root cause for the reported failure.A manufacturing record evaluation was performed for the finished device lot number (6l96843), and no non-conformance was identified.Should the device ever be received back in the future, this complaint file will be reopened at that time and an evaluation will be performed and documented.At this point in time, no corrective action is required, and no further action is warranted.However, depuy synthes mitek will continue to track any related complaints within this device family as a means of monitoring the extent with which this complaint is observed in the field.
|
| |
|
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.Investigation summary: the complaint device was received and evaluated.Upon visual inspection, it could be observed that the tip of the anchor is broken, biological matter on the anchor and the suture has been pull out of the white paper card.The shaft is in good condition as well as the inserter tip.A manufacturing record evaluation was performed for the finished device 6l96843 number, and no non-conformances were identified.As part of depuy synthes mitek quality process all devices are manufactured, inspected, and released to approved specifications.According with the visual inspection result, this complaint can be confirmed.A root cause for the broken anchor can be attributed to procedural variables, such handling of the device or product interaction during procedure; axial misalignment or bending force was applied to the tip of the device.As per ifu-109900: axial misalignment or levering with the anchor upon insertion may result in anchor fracture.Do not apply a bending force to the inserter.This can damage the anchor or inserter tip.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.
|
| |
|
Search Alerts/Recalls
|
|
|