| Catalog Number |
7205345 |
| Medical Device Problem Code |
Fracture (1260)
|
| Health Effect - Clinical Code |
No Clinical Signs, Symptoms or Conditions (4582)
|
| Date of Event |
07/30/2025
|
|
Type of Reportable Event
|
Malfunction
|
|
Event or Problem Description
|
|
It was reported that during an ankle arthroscopy, the tip or end of the incisor blade snapped off.The broken piece was retrieved from the patient.It is unknown how was the surgery completed.There was a delay of less than 30 minutes, and no further complications were reported.
|
| |
|
Additional Manufacturer Narrative
|
|
Internal complaint reference: (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.
|
| |
|
Additional Manufacturer Narrative
|
|
H10 h3, h6: the reported device was not returned to the designated complaint unit for independent evaluation.However, an image evaluation was performed and found the device tip separated from the shaft.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 no 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.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 used on the device or an impact event to the device inconsistent with normal use.Based on this investigation, the need for corrective action is not indicated.
|
| |
|
Additional Manufacturer Narrative
|
|
H10 h3, h6: the reported device was received for evaluation.A visual inspection revealed it was returned in an original packaging with the batch number of the complaint on the label.The color scheme of the device matches the print.The outer blade has fractured at the distal end and the weld.The fractured piece was not returned.The shaft of the inner and outer blades are bent from possible side-loading.A functional evaluation could not be conducted since there is damage hindering the inspection/evaluation.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 no 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 excessive force used on the device or an impact event to the device inconsistent with normal use based on this investigation, there is no evidence to suggest a design, material or manufacturing issue.Therefore, the need for corrective action is not indicated.
|
| |
|
Search Alerts/Recalls
|