|
|
| Catalog Number |
04.043.240S |
| Medical Device Problem Code |
Break (1069)
|
| Health Effect - Clinical Codes |
Insufficient Information (4580); No Clinical Signs, Symptoms or Conditions (4582)
|
| Date of Event |
01/14/2025
|
|
Type of Reportable Event
|
Malfunction
|
|
Additional Manufacturer Narrative
|
|
Product complaint # (b)(4).Depuy synthes is submitting this report pursuant to the provisions of 21 cfr, part 803.This report may be based on information which depuy synthes has not been able to investigate or verify prior to the required reporting date.This report does not reflect a conclusion by fda, depuy synthes or its employees that the report constitutes an admission that the device, depuy synthes, or its employees caused or contributed to the potential event described in this report.If the information is unknown, not available or does not apply, the section/field of the form is left blank.If information is obtained that was not available for the initial medwatch, a follow-up medwatch will be filed as appropriate.H11: additional narrative: d4: udi: the expiration date is currently not available.Therefore, the full udi is currently not available.
|
| |
|
Event or Problem Description
|
|
It was reported that on an unknown date in (b)(6) 2025, the tibial nail polymer inlay came out and broke on the distal aspect of the nail during reinsertion due to having to reduce the fracture further.The surgeon did not want to use the nail without a polymer inlay and wanted to use a new nail instead of the one that broke resulting in a fifteen (15) minute surgical delay while the staff got a replacement nail of the same size and diameter.The procedure was completed successfully.The patient status/outcome is unknown.
|
| |
|
Additional Manufacturer Narrative
|
|
Depuy synthes is submitting this report pursuant to the provisions of 21 cfr, part 803.This report may be based on information which depuy synthes has not been able to investigate or verify prior to the required reporting date.This report does not reflect a conclusion by fda, depuy synthes or its employees that the report constitutes an admission that the device, depuy synthes, or its employees caused or contributed to the potential event described in this report.H3, h4, h6: the photo was returned to j&j medtech orthopaedics for evaluation.The j&j medtech orthopaedics team conducted a visual inspection of the returned photo from attachment.Visual analysis of the photo revealed that tibial nail-advanced / 10 360 / sterile was observed with the distal inlay broken and protruding from the nail.With the information provided is not possible determine a definitive potential cause.As the device was not returned, an as-received condition could not be assessed, and a dimensional inspection and document/specification review were not completed.As part of j&j medtech orthopaedics quality process, all devices are manufactured, inspected, and released to approved specifications.The overall complaint was confirmed for tibial nail-advanced / 10 360 / sterile.There is no indication that a design or manufacturing issue has caused the complaint condition.Based on the investigation findings, it has been determined that no corrective and/or preventative action is proposed.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 product code: 04.043.240s-us, lot number: 33389p5, it was electronically reviewed and no nonconformances / manufacturing irregularities were identified during the manufacturing process.The product was released on: 25 sep 2024, manufacturing site: jabil bettlach, expiry date: 31 aug 2034.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
|
|
Additional information received states that the patient ended up with a new nail of the same size as the one that had the broken inlay.The nailing procedure went well once we got a replacement nail.No notable fragments were generated.Due to the inlay being pulled out and broken during insertion the nail would not progress down the canal easily and we couldn't get distal interlocking screws in, so we took more x rays than expected and had to do a nail removal before getting a replacement of the same size.Beyond that no further intervention was required.The only patient involvement was a slightly longer procedure due to having to remove a nail and then get a replacement.There wasn't any significant notable patient consequence.
|
| |
|
Search Alerts/Recalls
|
|
|