|
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 depuy mitek or its employees that the report constitutes an admission that the device, depuy 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.Additional narrative: udi: (b)(4).Reporter is a j&j sales representative.The device manufacture date is currently unavailable.Investigation summary: both a photo and the actual device were received and evaluated.Upon visual inspection of the photos, the device was shown, and only the identification numbers can be observed, the device lens are not shown in the photos.According with the inspection of the photo, this complaint cannot be confirmed.The photo provided does not contain relevant images to provide a root cause.Hands on analysis should provide the evidence necessary to provide a root cause.The complaint device was received at the service center and evaluated.During the service evaluation the following defects were identified: ¿ outer tube damaged, distal tip has deposits.¿ broken lenses in optical system.Per service reports, this complaint can be confirmed.The defective parts needs to be replaced to resolve the issues.As part of depuy mitek¿s quality process all devices are manufactured, inspected, and released to approved specifications.The faulty parts was identified as the root cause for the device failure during the service evaluation.Additional complaint information monitoring for potential safety signals is conducted through complaint trending as part of post market surveillance.At this point in time, no corrective action is required, and no further action is warranted.Depuy 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.As no defect was found, a potential cause cannot be associated to manufacturing, therefore a manufacturing record evaluation is not required. 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: manufacturing record evaluation is not required as the reported event is not associated with the manufacturing process and/or the potential cause of the defect cannot be associated to manufacturing.
|
|
It was reported by sales rep that pre-op to a specialty case- bilateral septoplasty, it was observed that the lens on the hd arthroscope/sinuscope 4.0mm x 45 deg x 167mm (mitek lock) device was cracked.During in-house engineering evaluation, it was determined that the device had broken lenses.Another like device was used to complete the procedure.There were no adverse patient consequences nor surgical delay reported.No additional information was provided.
|