|
As reported: "when it was performed the calibration before nail insertion, the sleeve was too hard to insert to the most proximal hole of the device.And the surgeon gave up screw inserting to that hole.The other proximal holes of the device were also checked and it was felt harder than usual.The nail was inserted as it was and inserted a screw into the proximal oval hole, but the sleeve would not be removed from the device.The surgeon pulled on the sleeve and the sleeve broke off.".
|
|
As reported: "when it was performed the calibration before nail insertion, the sleeve was too hard to insert to the most proximal hole of the device.And the surgeon gave up screw inserting to that hole.The other proximal holes of the device were also checked and it was felt harder than usual.The nail was inserted as it was and inserted a screw into the proximal oval hole, but the sleeve would not be removed from the device.The surgeon pulled on the sleeve and the sleeve broke off.".
|
|
The reported event could be confirmed based on the inspection performed.The device inspection revealed the following: the identification of the returned sleeve was confirmed based on the catalog # and lot # marked.The knob of the tip was returned detached from the sleeve and fractured, as a result of the reported forced disassembling.Multiple scratches were observed on the device's shaft, which are a result of friction with targeting arm during previous use, but also during the reported forced assembling and disassembling.Due to the wear, local material thickening could be observed on some parts.The sleeve was tested with the returned targeting arm.As reported, the insertion of the sleeve could not be properly performed in any of the holes.Afterwards, the targeting arm was tested with a fully functional sleeve, where the assembling and disassembling worked without any issue.This gives indication that the targeting arm is fully functional and that the impairment observed is solely related to the sleeve.Dimensional inspection gives indication that the sleeve was manufactured according to specification and that the local material thickening was indeed a result of wear.Based on investigation, the root cause was attributed to an user related issue.The impaired assembly was most probably caused by the local material thickening observed on parts on the sleeve, which is a result of friction with the targeting arm but of probable careless handling when performing the assembling during previous use.Furthermore, the fact that issue was noticed during the procedure gives indication that hcp failed to properly inspect the sleeve and the assembly of the instruments, as advised.As a reminder, the instructions for use clearly state: ¿ always treat the instrument carefully to avoid surface damage or alterations to the geometry.Before the surgical procedure, ensure that all components prepared for the procedure function correctly with each other.¿.A review of the device history for the reported lot did not indicate any abnormalities.No corrective actions are required at this time.A review of the labeling did not indicate any abnormalities.No indications of material, manufacturing or design related problems were found during the investigation.If more information is provided, the case will be reassessed.
|