| Catalog Number |
EIC7070-01 |
| Medical Device Problem Codes |
Failure to Deliver Energy (1211); Detachment of Device or Device Component (2907)
|
| Health Effect - Clinical Code |
No Clinical Signs, Symptoms or Conditions (4582)
|
| Date of Event |
10/27/2025
|
|
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 risks with the device itself or with its use 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 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 endoscopic resection of recurrent laryngeal papilloma, the metal wire of the tip of a procise lw wand had fallen off and there was no energy output.The procedure was resumed, after a non-significant delay, using an equivalent s+n back-up.No further complications were reported.The patient's status is fine.
|
| |
|
Additional Manufacturer Narrative
|
|
H2: corrected information in h6 (component code & investigation findings).H3, h6: the reported device was not returned to the designated complaint unit for independent evaluation.However, an analysis of the customer provided images found two perspectives of a wand, the product information can be seen in both pictures, the ref and lot numbers matches the reported product information.In one of the pictures the tip can be seen, no metal can be seen in the electrode area.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.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 1) hitting the device tip against a hard surface.2) using the device as a lever to enlarge surgical site.3) mechanical displacement of tissue through applied force.4) activating the device above recommended settings for prolonged periods of time.Based on this investigation, the need for corrective action is not indicated.
|
| |
|
Additional Manufacturer Narrative
|
|
H11: h3, h6: the reported device was received for evaluation.A visual inspection observed the returned instrument shows no manufacturing abnormalities.Product was out of the original packaging.No packaging returned.The tip is worn from use.The electrode is worn from use.A portion of the electrode is missing from the tip from use.A functional evaluation of the device found that the opened device was tested and plugged into the controller and registered settings (7,3).The wand can produce plasma with its remaining electrode and had no issues activating coag.The unit still activates with its remaining electrode.An analysis of the customer provided images found two perspectives of a wand, the product information can be seen in both pictures, the ref and lot numbers matches the reported product information.In one of the pictures the tip can be seen, no metal can be seen in the electrode area.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 (1) hitting the device tip against a hard surface.2) using the device as a lever to enlarge surgical site.3) mechanical displacement of tissue through applied force.4) activating the device above recommended settings for prolonged periods of time).Based on this investigation, the need for corrective action is not indicated.
|
| |
|
Search Alerts/Recalls
|