|
SMITH & NEPHEW, INC. HEALICOIL SA PK 5.5MM W/2 UB-BL, CBRD BL; FASTENER, FIXATION, NONDEGRADABLE, SOFT TISSUE
|
Back to Search Results |
|
| Catalog Number |
72203379 |
| Medical Device Problem Code |
Break (1069)
|
| Health Effect - Clinical Code |
No Clinical Signs, Symptoms or Conditions (4582)
|
| Date of Event |
09/20/2024
|
|
Type of Reportable Event
|
Malfunction
|
|
Additional Manufacturer Narrative
|
|
H10: internal complaint reference: (b)(4).H3, h6: this complaint was opened by smith+nephew to document a product problem associated with a smith+nephew device.The reported problem relates to known inherent device and/or procedural risks that are appropriately documented in our risk files.Smith+nephew will continue to monitor trends in accordance with our post-market surveillance process and take necessary action as required if anticipated severity and/or occurrence rates are exceeded.Smith+nephew has no reason to suspect that the product failed to meet any specifications at the time of manufacture.Based on our review of all currently available information, we are unable to identify a definitive root cause.However, as the use of our product cannot be excluded as a potential cause or contributory factor to the reported issue, we are conservatively submitting this report in accordance with applicable regulations.If additional information becomes available that alters the conclusions of this report, a follow-up report will be submitted as required.
|
| |
|
Event or Problem Description
|
|
It was reported that during a shoulder arthroscopy, the healicoil implant was broken.The pieces were removed with hand instrument.There was a back up device available.The back up device was used in the original drilled hole, there was no void left.A golden awl was used to prepare the insertion site.No delay was reported and no further complications were reported.
|
| |
|
Additional Manufacturer Narrative
|
|
H10: h3, h6: the reported device was not returned to the designated complaint unit for independent evaluation.However, an image evaluation was performed and found the anchor in the insertion device with broken threads.A review of device records showed there were no indications to suggest that the product did not meet manufacturing specifications upon release for distribution.A complaint history review found similar reported events.A risk management review found that the reported failure and/or harm was documented appropriately, and there were no indications to suggest the anticipated risk is not adequate.A review of the material specifications found that tensile strength requirements are specified.A material certificate of analysis (coa) is required for raw material.The root cause could not be determined since findings cannot lead to a clear cause of the reported event.Factors that could have contributed to the reported event include rough handling or excessive force to the device.Based on this investigation, the need for corrective action is not indicated.
|
| |
|
Additional Manufacturer Narrative
|
|
H11: h3, h6: the reported device was received for evaluation.A visual inspection revealed the device was returned in original packaging with the batch number of the complaint on the label.The sutures are still on the device, run through the cannula, and tied at the cleat.The anchor is still on the device.Multiple threads are fractured from the anchor and were not returned.Bio debris is present.Based on the condition of the product material found during visual inspection, additional material testing is not required.T evaluation.An image evaluation was performed and found the anchor in the insertion device with broken threads.A review of device records showed there were no indications to suggest that the product did not meet manufacturing specifications upon release for distribution.A complaint history review found similar reported events.A risk management review found that the reported failure and/or harm was documented appropriately, and there were no indications to suggest the anticipated risk is not adequate.A review of the material specifications found that tensile strength requirements are specified.A material certificate of analysis (coa) is required for raw material.The root cause could not be determined since findings cannot lead to a clear cause of the reported event.Factors that could have contributed to the reported event include rough handling or excessive force to the device.Based on this investigation, the need for corrective action is not indicated.
|
| |
|
Search Alerts/Recalls
|
|
|