|
|
| Catalog Number |
210818 |
| Medical Device Problem Code |
Break (1069)
|
| Health Effect - Clinical Code |
No Clinical Signs, Symptoms or Conditions (4582)
|
| Date of Event |
01/01/2023
|
|
Type of Reportable Event
|
Malfunction
|
|
Additional Manufacturer Narrative
|
|
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 mitek or its employees that the report constitutes an admission that the device, mitek, or its employees caused or contributed to the potential event described in this report.Device was used for treatment, not diagnosis.If information is obtained that was not available for the initial medwatch, a follow-up medwatch will be filed as appropriate.E3: reporter is a j&j sales representative.H4: the device manufacture date is unknown.Udi:(b)(4).As of this date, the device has not been returned for evaluation; therefore, the reported condition cannot be confirmed and/or duplicated.
|
| |
|
Event or Problem Description
|
|
It was reported by the sales rep that during an unspecified surgical procedure on (b)(6) 2023, one eyelet of the versalok peek anchor with orthocord device broke as the surgeon was loading the second permacord suture into the anchor.The anchor did not come into contact with patient.Another like device was used to complete the procedure.There was no delay in the procedure reported.There were no adverse patient consequences reported.No additional information was provided.
|
| |
|
Additional Manufacturer Narrative
|
|
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 mitek or its employees that the report constitutes an admission that the device, 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.Device was used for treatment, not diagnosis.H10 additional narrative: h4: the device manufacture date was unavailable in the initial medwatch report.The date been updated accordingly.Investigation summary the complaint device is not being returned, it was retained by the customer, therefore unavailable for a physical evaluation.Since the complaint device was not returned, we cannot determine a root cause for the reported failure.If additional information or the device is received in the future, we will reopen the complaint and perform the investigation as appropriate.A manufacturing record evaluation was performed for the finished device lot number (233l597), and no non-conformance was identified.At this point in time, no corrective action is required, and no further action is warranted.However, depuy synthes 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.
|
| |
|
Additional Manufacturer Narrative
|
|
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 mitek or its employees that the report constitutes an admission that the device, mitek, or its employees caused or contributed to the potential event described in this report.Device was used for treatment, not diagnosis.If information is obtained that was not available for the initial medwatch, a follow-up medwatch will be filed as appropriate.H10 additional narrative: investigation summary = > the product was returned to mitek for evaluation.Mitek then conducted visual inspection and functional test of device received.The device was received and evaluated.When performing the visual inspection, it could be observed that the anchor pin eyelet was broken.The suture was not returned.Neither the sleeve nor the inserter show any structural damage.A manufacturing record evaluation was performed for the finished device lot number, and no non-conformance was identified.As part of depuy synthes mitek quality process all devices are manufactured, inspected, and released to approved specifications.Based on the visual inspection; this complaint can be confirmed.A possible root cause for the issue experienced by the customer can be attributed to the procedural variables, such handling of the device or product interaction during procedure.As per instructions for use, use instructions are provided.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.
|
| |
|
Search Alerts/Recalls
|
|
|