|
Patient demographics (age at time of event, date of birth, gender, weight) were requested but not provided.No further patient information was provided at the time of this report or made available in response to follow-up communication.No additional adverse consequences have been reported from this event.This device is used for treatment.The device was requested for evaluation but was not returned, therefore the complainant's event could not be verified.The cause of the event could not be determined from the information available and without device evaluation.Device history record review revealed nothing relevant to this event.Complainant's event typically caused by user mechanical damage to device such as hitting the device with another device, prying/leveraging or excessive bending forces being applied during use.This is the first complaint of this type for this part/lot combination.The potential causes of this event are being communicated to the event reporter.If additional relevant information is received, a follow-up report will be submitted.
|
|
It was reported that as the surgeon was performing an arthroscopic left knee acl reconstruction procedure, the head of the reamer broke as it was being started.The head of the reamer was in contact with the patient's bone and broke into three pieces - shaft and two blades.One of the blades was embedded into the bone and the other was lost from view.The sales rep suggested to check the posterior compartment and a basic examination was carried out.The surgeon was unconcerned, however, requested an x-ray be taken whilst in recovery.Follow-up investigation: device is not available for return as it was kept by the hospital in a sharps container and cannot be retrieved.The third piece of the device was left in the posterior compartment of the patient's joint.An image intensifier was used to locate the fragments and therefore a picture is unable to be provided.
|