| Catalog Number |
72203378 |
| Medical Device Problem Code |
Fracture (1260)
|
| Health Effect - Clinical Code |
No Clinical Signs, Symptoms or Conditions (4582)
|
| Date of Event |
12/08/2025
|
|
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 rotator cuff repair, when tried to implant the healicoil anchor, it fractured.No broken pieces fell inside the patient.The procedure was completed with a surgical delay of less than 30 minutes using an equivalent s+n back-up device in the original bone hole.No void left in the patient.No further complications were reported.
|
| |
|
Additional Manufacturer Narrative
|
|
H11: h2: additional information in b5 and h6: health effect - impact code.
|
| |
|
Event or Problem Description
|
|
It was reported that, during a rotator cuff repair, when tried to implant the healicoil anchor, it fractured when it was driven halfway into the patient.The fractured anchor was removed from the patient.The procedure was completed with a surgical delay of less than 30 minutes using an equivalent s+n back-up device in the original bone hole.No void left in the patient.No further complications were reported.
|
| |
|
Additional Manufacturer Narrative
|
|
H11 h3, h6 the reported device was received for evaluation.A visual inspection showed the device was returned in original packaging with the batch number of the complaint on the label.The blue/white suture is through the anchor and run through the cannula.The blue suture is run through the anchor but has been pulled out of the cannula.The anchor is on the device and fractured.Bio debris is present.Based on the condition of the product material found during visual inspection, additional material testing is not required.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 tensile strength requirements are specified.A material certificate of analysis (coa) is required for raw material.A definitive root cause for the reported issue could not be determined.Factors that could have contributed to the reported event include an inadvertent impact event that may have occurred during device transportation, rough shipping and handling, or at the customer site, as well as the application of an unintended, inappropriate, or excessive force to the device.Based on this investigation, the need for corrective action is not indicated.
|
| |
|
Search Alerts/Recalls
|