|
MEDOS INTERNATIONAL SÃ RL TRUESPAN 0 DEGREE PEEK; FASTENER, FIXATION, NONDEGRADABLE, SOFT TISSUE
|
Back to Search Results |
|
| Catalog Number |
228150 |
| Medical Device Problem Code |
Device-Device Incompatibility (2919)
|
| Health Effect - Clinical Code |
No Clinical Signs, Symptoms or Conditions (4582)
|
| Date of Event |
04/18/2024
|
|
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 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.Device was used for treatment, not diagnosis.H10 additional narrative: udi: (b)(4).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 submitted accordingly.
|
| |
|
Event or Problem Description
|
|
It was reported that during a meniscectomy procedure, it was observed that the trigger on the truespan 0 degree peek got stuck on the first and second shot resulting in the failure to secure the wire in the patient's mensicus.Another like device was used to complete the procedure.There were no adverse consequences to the patient reported nor surgical delay 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 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.Device was used for treatment, not diagnosis.H10 additional narrative: h4: the device manufacture date was reported as unknown on the initial report; and has been updated accordingly.
|
| |
|
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 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.Device was used for treatment, not diagnosis.H10 additional narrative: d9, h3, h6: the actual device has been returned and is currently pending evaluation.Once reliability engineering evaluates the device, a supplemental medwatch report will be sent accordingly.If information is obtained that was not available for the initial medwatch, a follow-up medwatch will be filed as appropriate.
|
| |
|
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 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.Device was used for treatment, not diagnosis.H10 additional narrative: investigation summary = > the product was returned to depuy synthes mitek for evaluation.Depuy synthes mitek then conducted visual inspection of the device received.The device was received and evaluated; white sleeve was removed to verify the presence of both plates and suture, they were not returned for revaluation, however it was noted that the needle is deformed.The rest of the device is in a normal condition.To test its functionality the red trigger was pressed and the spring pusher could not easily pass through the bent part of the needle.The overall complaint was confirmed as the observed condition of the truespan 0 degree peek would contribute to the complained device issue.¿ based on the investigation findings, the potential root cause for the device damage can be attributed to procedural variables, such handling of the device or product interaction during procedure; an excessive manipulation of the device, tilting movements of the applier needle while it was inserted causing the needle to break.It has been determined that no corrective and/or preventative action is proposed.There is no indication that a design or manufacturing issue has caused the reported complaint condition.As part of depuy synthes mitek quality process, all devices are manufactured, inspected, and released to approved specifications.Additional monitoring for any potential safety signals will be conducted through complaint trending and other post-market safety surveillance activities.Device history review a manufacturing record evaluation was performed for the finished device lot number (154l986), and no non-conformance was identified.
|
| |
|
Search Alerts/Recalls
|
|
|