|
|
| Catalog Number |
J328H |
| Medical Device Problem Code |
Material Separation (1562)
|
| Health Effect - Clinical Code |
No Clinical Signs, Symptoms or Conditions (4582)
|
|
Type of Reportable Event
|
Malfunction
|
|
Additional Manufacturer Narrative
|
|
Product complaint # (b)(4).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 ethicon inc, or its employees that the report constitutes an admission that the product, ethicon inc, or its employees caused or contributed to the potential event described in this report.If information is obtained that was not available for the initial report, a follow-up report will be filed as appropriate.H3 investigation summary: the product was returned to ethicon for evaluation.One detached needle and one empty labeled winding former that pertains to product code j328h.During visual inspection of the returned sample, it was observed that the needle was noted to be broken at the swage area.The other section of the needle was not returned for evaluation.This sample will be shipped to hsa for further analysis due to the needle breakage.A manufacturing record evaluation was performed for the finished device batch number, and no non-conformances were identified.No conclusion could be reached due to the sample needs additional evaluation by hsa.As part of the ethicon quality process, all devices are manufactured, inspected, and released to approved specifications.Additional complaint information monitoring for potential safety signals is conducted through complaint trending as part of post-market surveillance.A manufacturing record evaluation was performed for the finished device lot number, and no related non-conformances were identified.
|
| |
|
Event or Problem Description
|
|
It was reported that a patient underwent an unknown procedure on an unknown date and suture was used.The suture was detached from the needle during use in surgery.The doctor said that the suture was detached from the needle when using it to fix a camera port.There was no problem to the patient.It was not a control release needle.Another product was used to complete the case.There were no adverse consequences to the patient.Further details are not provided from the hp.
|
| |
|
Additional Manufacturer Narrative
|
|
Product complaint # (b)(4).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 ethicon inc, or its employees that the report constitutes an admission that the product, ethicon inc or its employees caused or contributed to the potential event described in this report.If information is obtained that was not available for the initial report, a follow-up report will be filed as appropriate.Additional information: h6, d9, h3.H3 investigation summary: a failed suture needle, labeled as (b)(4), was submitted to herrera, stafford and associates, llc (hsa) for fractographic evaluation on august 11, 2025.The component was identified as product code j328h.It was requested that hsa assess the fracture mode of the failure.According to the information, it was reported pull off - suture needle.The product received for analysis was j328h visual inspection and metallurgical analysis were performed on the returned product.A fracture was observed at the suture attachment of the needle.The needle was received in two pieces, only one of the mating fracture surfaces was examined for this evaluation.A scanning electron microscope (sem) was used to examine the fracture surfaces and surrounding area of the needle.The fracture surfaces were examined in multiple locations to determine the fracture mode.The evaluation of (b)(4) revealed the fracture was composed of microvoid coalescence, which is evidence of a ductile fracture mode.Mechanical damage observed coincidental to the fracture provides additional evidence that the failure was induced by mechanical deformation leading to ductile overload.This was a ductile fracture.
|
| |
|
Search Alerts/Recalls
|
|
|