| Catalog Number |
865226 |
| Medical Device Problem Code |
Break (1069)
|
| Health Effect - Clinical Code |
Insufficient Information (4580)
|
| Date of Event |
10/23/2024
|
|
Type of Reportable Event
|
Malfunction
|
|
Additional Manufacturer Narrative
|
|
This report is being submitted pursuant to the provisions of 21 cfr, part 803 (and/or part 4, as applicable).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 depuy synthes, or its employees that the report constitutes an admission that the product, depuy synthes, 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.
|
| |
|
Event or Problem Description
|
|
It was reported that a part of the extraction instrument broke apart.Surgical delay was unknown.
|
| |
|
Additional Manufacturer Narrative
|
|
Product complaint # (b)(4).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 depuy synthes joint reconstruction, or its employees that the report constitutes an admission that the product, depuy synthes joint reconstruction, 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
|
|
Product complaint # (b)(4).Investigation summary: it was reported that a part of the extraction instrument broke apart.Surgical delay was unknown.The product was returned to j&j medtech orthopaedics for evaluation.Visual inspection of the returned device found the weld between handle and shaft, broke.The broken fragments were returned for evaluation.The breakage appears to be consistent with the effects of repeated use and servicing over a period exceeding 15 years.The lifecycle requirements of the device are event related and depend on the use and inspection of the device in clinical practice.As the device can be damaged on the first or 100th use, the device must be properly inspected prior to each surgical use.Refer to the device/country specific ifu for information related to end of life, reprocessing instructions, and inspection procedures.A functional test was not conducted due to not being applicable to the complaint condition.A dimensional inspection was not conducted due to not being applicable to the complaint condition.The overall complaint was confirmed as the observed condition of the pfc stem trial extract would have contributed to the complained device issue.Based on the investigation findings, the potential cause is traced to end of life, and 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 j&j medtech orthopaedics 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 lot: a device history record (dhr) review or manufacturing records evaluation (mre) was not possible because the date code (g0209) provided is not a valid finished goods lot number.
|
| |
|
Search Alerts/Recalls
|