| Catalog Number |
NSLG2C25 |
| Medical Device Problem Codes |
Detachment of Device or Device Component (2907); Material Integrity Problem (2978)
|
| Health Effect - Clinical Code |
No Clinical Signs, Symptoms or Conditions (4582)
|
| Date of Event |
01/01/2023
|
|
Type of Reportable Event
|
Malfunction
|
|
Event or Problem Description
|
|
It was reported that during an unknown procedure the device was not functioning properly.
|
| |
|
Additional Manufacturer Narrative
|
|
(b)(4).Date sent: 10/11/2023.B3: event year only reported: 2023.D4 batch #: u93u3m.Additional information was requested and the following was obtained: there are two enseal nslg2c25 proves with physical broken jaw damage.Please clarify what part of the jaw broke for each device : the upper jaw of one of the device was detached did the electrode ceramic separate or break off? did the i blade get damaged or break off? is the jaw damaged but not broken off? is the top jaw loose but not detached? : blades of both the probes were dislodged from their positions is the top jaw ptc material damaged? : ptc was not damaged.Attempts are being made to obtain the following information.To date, no response has been provided.If further details are received at a later date, a supplemental medwatch will be sent: were there any patient consequences? attempts have been made to retrieve the device.To date the device has not been returned.If the device or further details are received at a later date a supplemental medwatch will be sent.A manufacturing record evaluation was performed for the finished device batch number, and no non-conformance were identified.This report is being submitted pursuant to the provisions of 21 cfr, part 803.This report may be based on information which has not been investigated or verified prior to the required reporting date.This report does not reflect a conclusion by ethicon, or its employees that the report constitutes an admission that the product, ethicon, 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 report, a follow-up report will be filed as appropriate.
|
| |
|
Additional Manufacturer Narrative
|
|
(b)(4).Date sent: 10/27/2023.Additional information was requested and the following was obtained: were there any patient consequences? there were no patient consequences.Investigation summary: the product was returned for evaluation.Visual inspection and functional testing were conducted on the returned device.Visual analysis of the returned sample revealed that the device was returned with the upper jaw detached not returned, the lower jaw was returned apart inside a plastic bag, the energy button was detached returned as well.The i-blade was noted to be complete in good visual condition and not damaged as reported.In addition the trigger was noted to be cracked.The device was connected to the generator and it was recognized.Because the jaw was detached not all functional testing could be performed with the generator.A probable cause of the damage to the jaw could be not allowing thick and fibrous tissues to denature prior to i-blade advancement.As described in the ifu: do not use excessive force on the closing handle to close the jaws; grasp only as much tissue as will fit between the jaws where the current will pass.Greater amounts of tissue require more closing handle force.Excessive force could damage the device.Please reference the instruction for use for more information: as part of the quality process all devices are manufactured, inspected, and released to approved specifications.
|
| |
|
Search Alerts/Recalls
|