| Catalog Number |
398.41.96 |
| Medical Device Problem Code |
Break (1069)
|
| Health Effect - Clinical Code |
No Code Available (3191)
|
|
Type of Reportable Event
|
Malfunction
|
|
Additional Manufacturer Narrative
|
|
There was no known reported patient involvement associated with the complained event.Date of event: unknown when device malfunctioned.Device is an instrument and is not implanted/explanted.Complainant part is expected to be returned for manufacturer review/investigation, but has yet to be received.(b)(4).The investigation could not be completed; no conclusion could be drawn, as no product was received.Device was used for treatment, not diagnosis.If information is obtained that was not available for the initial medwatch, a follow-up medwatch will be filed as appropriate.
|
| |
|
Event or Problem Description
|
|
It was reported that during inspection of the devices in sterile processing department, it was noted that the pointed clamp (one of the points of a reduction forceps) was broken off.This issue was noticed while putting a set back together in sterile processing.There is no reported patient involvement or harm.This report is for one (1) reduction forceps with points broad-ratchet.This is report 1 of 1 for complaint (b)(4).
|
| |
|
Additional Manufacturer Narrative
|
|
The subject device has been received and the product evaluation is in progress.No conclusion can be drawn.Device was used for treatment, not diagnosis.If information is obtained that was not available for the initial medwatch, a follow-up medwatch will be filed as appropriate.
|
| |
|
Additional Manufacturer Narrative
|
|
A device history record (dhr) review was performed for part number: 398.41.96, synthes lot number: a7oa17: date of manufacture: week 17, 2005, place of manufacture: n/a, part expiration date: n/a, list of nonconformance¿s: n/a: a dhr review can not be performed due to the age of device (over 12 years old).No dhr available.A product investigation was performed.It was confirmed that one of the tips of the device is broken.The broken tip was not returned with the device.Replication of the complaint condition is not applicable as the device is already broken.Relevant drawings were reviewed during investigation.Dimensional analysis of the broken tip could not be performed.The tip has a tapered design and the breakage does not align with the reference points called out on the drawing.A dhr review was unable to be performed due to the age of the device.Based on the age of the device there is no indication that a material or hardness issue contributed to the complaint condition therefore further investigation will not be conducted.No definitive root cause could be determined however the device is over 12 years old and was likely exposed to excessive forces over its lifetime.During the investigation, no product design issues or discrepancies were observed that may have contributed to the complaint condition.Based on the investigation findings, it has been determined that no corrective and/or preventative action is proposed.Device was used for treatment, not diagnosis.If information is obtained that was not available for the initial medwatch, a follow-up medwatch will be filed as appropriate.
|
| |
|
Search Alerts/Recalls
|