|
The reported event could be confirmed as device was returned and matches to the alleged event.The returned device was visually inspected with the help of a microscope, revealing slight misdrilling marks on the distal end.There is significant deformation at the distal end, and small marks are also visible on the proximal end.This is confirmed by the notable signs of wear (shiny areas) around the lag screw hole and, more importantly, on the distal portion.The microscopic inspection revealed that the breakage originated on the lateral side of the nail.The presence of rest lines, a relatively smooth fracture surface on the initiation side, and abrupt features on the other side provide evidence of a fatigue fracture.Signs of a rapid fracture are visible in both the distal and proximal portions of the nail, indicating that the implant broke suddenly under high load.The shiny areas observed on the fracture surface result from friction between both portions during the breakage.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.The broken nail was returned for evaluation and no product related issue could be detected.Neither x-rays, nor operation report, nor additional details about patient activity or medical history was available.Therefore the root cause of the breakage cannot be defined.The evaluation of the nail has shown that fatigue caused by high loads did lead to the breakage of the device.If any additional information is provided, the investigation will be reassessed.
|