| Catalog Number |
PLP2020 |
| Medical Device Problem Code |
Material Fragmentation (1261)
|
| Health Effect - Clinical Code |
Foreign Body In Patient (2687)
|
| Date of Event |
07/02/2025
|
|
Type of Reportable Event
|
Serious Injury
|
|
Additional Manufacturer Narrative
|
|
The reported device is being returned to conmed for evaluation.A supplemental and final report will be filed following the completion of the device evaluation and complaint investigation.We will continue to monitor per regulatory requirements to help ensure patient safety.
|
| |
|
Event or Problem Description
|
|
A distributor reported on behalf of a customer that the plp2020, elite surgical smoke evacuation pencil device was used in an unknown procedure on (b)(6) 2025, and ¿plastic piece that suctions smoke broke off handpiece.No injuries.¿.The procedure was completed with the use of an alternate device and ¿no significant delay¿.Further assessment found it is unknown whether any fragment or component fell into the surgical site.There was no report of injury, medical/surgical intervention, or extended hospitalization for the patient.This report is being raised due to the injury of a possible retained foreign body.
|
| |
|
Event or Problem Description
|
|
A distributor reported on behalf of a customer that the plp2020, elite surgical smoke evacuation pencil device was used in an unknown procedure on (b)(6) 2025, and ¿plastic piece that suctions smoke broke off handpiece.No injuries.¿.The procedure was completed with the use of an alternate device and ¿no significant delay¿.Further assessment found it is unknown whether any fragment or component fell into the surgical site.There was no report of injury, medical/surgical intervention, or extended hospitalization for the patient.This report is being raised due to the injury of a possible retained foreign body.
|
| |
|
Additional Manufacturer Narrative
|
|
Examination of returned used device plp2020 found that the plastic tube above where the electrode blade goes had broken off and became disconnected from the rest of the device.Examination was done per (b)(4), plumepen elite surgical smoke evacuation pencil instructions for use.A root cause cannot be determined; however, based upon evaluation of the device, a possible cause of this event could be the use of excessive force.A two-year lot history review shows a total of (b)(4) device for this lot number and failure mode.A device history record (dhr) review was requested from the manufacturer, and no indication of abnormalities was communicated.A two-year review of complaint history revealed there has been a total of (b)(4) reports, regarding (b)(4) devices, for this device family and failure mode.During this same time frame (b)(4) devices have been manufactured and shipped worldwide.Should all the complaint devices have been found confirmed for this reported failure, the rate of failure would be (b)(4).We will continue to monitor per regulatory requirements to help ensure patient safety.
|
| |
|
Search Alerts/Recalls
|