|
H3, h6: the reported device was received for evaluation.It was determined the device did not contribute to the reported event.A review of device records showed there were no indications to suggest that the product did not meet manufacturing specification upon release for distribution.A complaint history review found no similar reported events.The instructions for use was reviewed and found to include conditions of off label use and technique specifics, as well as precautions and warnings related to the use of the device.A risk management review found that the reported failure was documented appropriately, and there were no indications to suggest the anticipated risk is not adequate.A visual inspection found two minor scuffs on the shaft but did not observe any missing pieces of metal or coating.The shaft was checked by eye and under microscope.This case reports, after successful implantation of the anchor and removal of the inserter, metal shavings were visualized via the scope and ¿removed with an arthroscopic shaver.¿ how the procedure was completed, if there was a procedural delay, or if a backup device was used is unknown.Without the requested clinical information or the device, a thorough medical investigation cannot be rendered nor can the root cause of the reported failure be determined.The impact to the patient beyond that which has already been reported cannot be confirmed nor concluded.Therefore, no further medical assessment is warranted at this time.Should any additional relevant clinical information be provided, this complaint would be re-assessed.The complaint was not confirmed and the root cause could not be established since the reported failure could not be duplicated during product evaluation.Factors that may have contributed to the reported event include a failure of a different device prior to healicoil use.No containment or corrective actions are recommended at this time.
|