|
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.Udi: (b)(4).The lot number was unknown; therefore, the expiration date, manufacturing site name and device manufacture date were unknown.Initial reporter is a j&j sales representative.Investigation summary: the product was returned to mitek for evaluation.Mitek then conducted visual inspection of device received.Visual observation revealed that the distal end was deformed, and the device had wear marks; confirming the damage reported.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.The possible root cause can be attributed this damage in the tip when the device might have been dropped or device was tapped against a hard surface accidentally.It is determined that the reusable instrument is worn from repeated use and servicing, this failure can be attributed to normal field wear.However, it cannot be conclusively affirmed.Lot number on the device indicates this device is 2 years old and hence this failure can be attributed to normal field wear.As per ifu- 108410 the precautions for this type of device consist of inspect the condition of the device prior to use.This device can damage, worn or bent; therefore, when this occurs it need to replace.The instrument life is generally determined by the wear or damaged from handling or surgical use.At this point in time, no corrective action is required, and no further action is warranted.However, in depuy synthes mitek, additional complaint information monitoring for potential safety signals is conducted 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.
|
|
This is report 2 of 2 for (b)(4).It was reported by the sales rep that during processing, it was observed that the intrafix family sheath inserter device had physical damage.During in-house engineering evaluation, it was determined that the distal end was deformed on the device.There was no procedure nor patient involvement reported.
|