|
|
| Catalog Number |
72201769 |
| Medical Device Problem Codes |
Break (1069); Crack (1135)
|
| Health Effect - Clinical Code |
No Clinical Signs, Symptoms or Conditions (4582)
|
| Date of Event |
07/15/2025
|
|
Type of Reportable Event
|
Malfunction
|
|
Additional Manufacturer Narrative
|
|
H11: internal complaint reference: (b)(4).H3, h6: 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 an arthroscopy, upon screwing into the tibia, the 6x25 biosure screws broke, it cracked in half.All broken pieces were removed using tweezers and gillies.Surgery was completed with a change in surgical technique, a footprint mini was used to anchor the root repair without secondary fixation of a screw.The footprint device was used to anchor the ultraloop suture into the tibia.There was no void left in the patient, as the 4.5 footprint was used as a primary fixation.There was a surgical delay of less than 30 minutes, and no further complications were reported.The repair was successful and the surgeon was satisfied with the surgical outcome.
|
| |
|
Additional Manufacturer Narrative
|
|
H11: h3, h6: the reported device was not returned to the designated complaint unit for independent evaluation.However, an analysis of the customer provided image found two different screws.One is in the insertion device, is cracked on the side, and the insertion device goes through it.The second screw is next to the first one, the tip of the device is fractured.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 review of the material specifications found that the storage requirements for the material are specified, and the material must comply with provided percentage composition specifications as measured by ash test.The root cause of the reported event could not be determined since findings cannot lead to a clear cause of the reported event.Factors that could have contributed to the reported event include excessive force on the device, excessive torque on the device, attempted correction of a damaged device, off-axis insertion, improper preparation of the insertion site, or an inadvertent impact event inconsistent with normal use.Based on this investigation, the need for corrective action is not indicated.
|
| |
|
Search Alerts/Recalls
|
|
|