|
|
| Catalog Number |
72203299 |
| Medical Device Problem Code |
Break (1069)
|
| Health Effect - Clinical Code |
No Clinical Signs, Symptoms or Conditions (4582)
|
| Date of Event |
06/02/2025
|
|
Type of Reportable Event
|
Malfunction
|
|
Additional Manufacturer Narrative
|
|
H11: internal complaint reference: case-(b)(4).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 investigative findings or 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 procedure, when the patient was ready for draping an airway emergency occurred, the patient's oxygen desaturated and the crna put the head of bed up for code.The spider 2 tenet that was being used was compromised during the emergency, the screw mount broke off, causing the case to not seal.Surgery was cancelled by anesthesia due to patient safety concerns.The procedure was rescheduled and performed on (b)(6) 2025.No further complications were reported.Patient's status is stable.
|
| |
|
Additional Manufacturer Narrative
|
|
H11: internal complaint reference: case-(b)(4).H3, h6: the reported device was received for evaluation.A visual inspection found the enclosures are broken and separated, exposing internal electrical components.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 definitive root cause for the reported issue could not be determined.Factors that could have contributed to the failure include procedural variance, or deviations from established protocols, increasing risks and leading to unintended consequences (an impact event to the device inconsistent with normal use).Based on this investigation, the need for corrective action is not indicated.
|
| |
|
Search Alerts/Recalls
|
|
|