| Catalog Number |
72201494 |
| Medical Device Problem Codes |
Device Dislodged or Dislocated (2923); Firing Problem (4011)
|
| Health Effect - Clinical Code |
No Clinical Signs, Symptoms or Conditions (4582)
|
| Date of Event |
12/07/2025
|
|
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 alter the conclusions of this report, a follow-up report will be submitted as required.
|
| |
|
Event or Problem Description
|
|
It was reported that during a meniscus repair, when t1 was fired from one (1) ultra fast-fix, both ts came out.T1 was deployed through the meniscus.Both ts were removed with tweezers.The procedure was resumed, after a non-significant delay, using an equivalent s+n back-up.Additional anesthesia was not required as consequence of the surgical prolongation.No further complications were reported.
|
| |
|
Additional Manufacturer Narrative
|
|
H11: h2: corrected data on h6 (medical device problem code).
|
| |
|
Additional Manufacturer Narrative
|
|
H11: internal complaint reference (b)(4).H3, h6: the reported device was received for evaluation.A visual evaluation showed the device was returned in original packaging with the batch number of the complaint on the label.The t1, t2, and suture were returned on the device.The variable depth straw has been trimmed.There is no visible defect.A functional evaluation, using a simulation meniscus, showed the t1 and t2 deployed and implanted as intended.An analysis of the customer provided image found the device lying on a metal tray with the sutures outside the needle.No t´s are visible.The failure could not be evaluated.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 could not be determined since the reported malfunction could not be duplicated during the investigation.Factors that can contribute to the reported event include second actuation of the device or excessive retraction of the device causing t2 to be pulled from the needle.Based on this investigation, the need for corrective action is not indicated.
|
| |
|
Search Alerts/Recalls
|