| Catalog Number |
1000-00-101 |
| Medical Device Problem Code |
Physical Resistance/Sticking (4012)
|
| Health Effect - Clinical Code |
No Clinical Signs, Symptoms or Conditions (4582)
|
| Date of Event |
05/29/2025
|
|
Type of Reportable Event
|
Malfunction
|
|
Additional Manufacturer Narrative
|
|
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, 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.Device was used for treatment, not diagnosis.If information is obtained that was not available for the initial medwatch, a follow-up medwatch will be filed as appropriate.H11 additional narrative: the actual device has been returned and is currently pending evaluation.Once the evaluation has been completed, a supplemental medwatch report will be sent accordingly.
|
| |
|
Event or Problem Description
|
|
It was reported that during pre-surgery, the impactor device trigger was stuck and not springing back.This event did not occur during surgery.There were no reports of injuries, medical intervention or prolonged hospitalization.All available information has been disclosed.
|
| |
|
Additional Manufacturer Narrative
|
|
This report is being submitted in pursuant to the provisions of 21 cfr, part 803.This report may be based on information which has not been able to investigate or verify prior to the required reporting date.This report does not reflect a conclusion by mitek or its employees that the report constitutes an admission that the device, mitek, or its employees caused or contributed to the potential event described in this report.Device was used for treatment, not diagnosis.If information is obtained that was not available for the initial medwatch, a follow-up medwatch will be filed as appropriate.H11 additional narrative: investigation summary: the device was functionally / visually tested according to the functional assessment.The described failure by the customer was not confirmed.The device was visually inspected as received from the customer.It was found that the device passed visual inspection.Investigation is based on the assessment performed by the complaint technical investigator.The device failed the following inspection criteria¿s during the functional assessment: 4.9 impactor operation assessment: fail.4.12.1 intermittent test assessment: n/a.4.13 final assessment: scrap.The kincise surgical impactor was visually and functionally assessed and determined to operate with low power due to unknown reasons.This is considered normal wear due to general tool degradation since the impactor met its life expectancy due to its high cycle count.No further action required at this time since the condition is consistent with normal wear, and no other issues were observed.The most relevant root cause is linked to normal wear.
|
| |
|
Search Alerts/Recalls
|