|
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 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 product was returned to mitek for evaluation.Mitek then conducted visual inspection of device received.Visual observations revealed that the device had wear marks.The inner shaft was removed, as a result, the edge of the cutter was found slightly dull.The hub that covers the inner shaft was also reviewed for any anomalies and the edge was found dull as well.A screw in the handle was missing; therefore, the device was not functioning as expected.No broken condition on the clamp was found.A manufacturing record evaluation was performed for the finished device 13m01 number, and no non-conformances were identified.According with the visual inspection result, this complaint cannot be confirmed.The possible root cause for the condition of the device could be attributed to the constant use of the device, the continuous sterilization process and the age of the device.As per ifu; end of useful instrument life is generally determined by wear or damage from handling or surgical use.Inspect instruments between uses to verify proper functioning.It is the responsibility of the end user to ensure that the cleaning and sterilization is actually performed using appropriate equipment, materials, and personnel to achieve the desired result.Inspect all instruments before sterilization or storage to ensure the complete removal of soil from surfaces, tubes and holes, moveable parts.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.
|