|
It was reported that, two (2) weeks after a thumb cmc fusion surgery was performed on (b)(6) 2022 using two (2) memofix nitinol staple 15mmx15mmx15mm devices, one of them fractured.This was noticed by x-rays of the fusion site in a postoperative visit; however, intraoperative x-rays had confirmed the correct position and fixation of the staples.It is unknown how this event has been addressed; therefore, it is ongoing.
|
|
H3, h6: the product has not been received at the aus site for evaluation, but photographs were provided.The complaint was confirmed.The following investigative actions were performed.- complaint history review: the complaint history review identified no similar reported events for this device.No adverse trend was identified.Future complaints for this failure mode will continue to be monitored and investigated as required.- risk management review (device): identified no issues which could have caused or contributed to the reported event.The failure mode was previously identified by the risk management file and the anticipated risk level is acceptable.- capa/nc/pra/hhe/field action review: identified no previous events or issues which could have caused or contributed to the reported event.Assessment of historical escalated cases concluded that there are no prior actions related to this device and failure mode.- device labeling/ifu review: identified no issues which could have caused or contributed to the reported event.This review determined that the device met labeling requirements upon release for distribution.- product prints/specifications/procedure review: identified no issues which could have caused or contributed to the reported event.This review determined that the device met product specifications upon release for distribution.- clinical/medical evaluation: no clinical factors were found which would have contributed to the reported fracture.Biocompatibility is not an issue with the nitinol staple.Micro-motion or movement cannot be predicted.There is potential risk for tissue inflammation and/or pain.The complaint alleges that the implant was found to have broken but does not indicate that revision surgery was required.As no products have been received for evaluation, it could not be determined whether the device contributed to the reported events.As the product lot numbers were not reported, it could not be determined whether the devices met manufacturing specifications.As the product was not returned for evaluation, a definitive root cause for the reported event could not be determined.Potential causes for the reported event include inadequate or incorrect surgical technique and mishandling or inappropriate activity post-surgery.According to the instructions for use for the memofix system, "use of the staple system is contraindicated.In patients with high levels of activity; [and] in patients who are not able to comply with post-operative treatment protocols".It also mentions possible adverse effects, including "fracture of the implant due to non-compliance to post-operative regimen, improper implant selection, or non-union¿.Based on this investigation, the need for corrective action is not indicated as no non-conformances or manufacturing deficiencies were identified and the risk level is acceptable.If additional information is later received, the complaint may be reopened.No further investigation is warranted for this complaint, though future complaints will be monitored and investigated as required.This investigation can be closed.
|