|
SMITH & NEPHEW, INC. TWINFIX ULTRA HA 4.5 W/2 UB (WH & BLUE; FASTENER, FIXATION, BIODEGRADABLE, SOFT TISSUE
|
Back to Search Results |
|
| Catalog Number |
72202597 |
| Medical Device Problem Code |
Break (1069)
|
| Health Effect - Clinical Code |
No Clinical Signs, Symptoms or Conditions (4582)
|
| Date of Event |
03/11/2026
|
|
Type of Reportable Event
|
Malfunction
|
|
Additional Manufacturer Narrative
|
|
H11: internal complaint reference: case-(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 surgery, after opening the hole with the 4.5 tap, the twinfix anchor broke when screwed in.The broken pieces were 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 further complications were reported.
|
| |
|
Additional Manufacturer Narrative
|
|
H11: internal complaint reference: case-(b)(4).H3, h6: the reported device was not returned to the designated complaint unit for independent evaluation.However, an image evaluation was performed and found on image one the tip of the anchor broken while being on the insertion device.Image two shows an arthroscopic view of the screw during insertion.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 the storage requirements for the material are specified, and the material must comply with provided percentage composition specifications as measured by ash test.A clinical review states per case details the broken pieces were retrieved from the patient.A photo of the device and an intraoperative photo were provided for review, the photos confirm the reported; however, they do not indicate a root cause for the reported event.The procedure was completed using a back-up device.No patient injuries or adverse consequences were reported.Since no patient injuries are being reported no further clinical/medical assessment is warranted at this time 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 failure include excessive force on the device, excessive torque on the device, attempted correction of a damaged device, off-axis insertion, improper preparation of the insertion site, or an inadvertent impact event inconsistent with normal use.Based on this investigation, the need for corrective action is not indicated.
|
| |
|
Search Alerts/Recalls
|
|
|