If information is obtained that was not available for the initial medwatch, a follow-up medwatch will be filed as appropriate.(b)(4).Associated medwatches: mr#1221934-2018-50497, mr#1221934-2018-50496, mr#1221934-2018-50499.
|
It was reported that the theatre team ended up using 4 x sets of implants whilst using the rigidfix cross pin set.This is due to a couple of problems that the surgeon encountered: the small pins on the trocar would snap off while trying to drive the trocar/sleeve combination through the alignment jig and into the femur.On two instances, the sleeve ended up fusing to the trocar.On the 4th (and final) implant available, the surgeon made the decision to leave only one pin for fixation (rather than the recommended two pins) due to the problems encountered.In this instance, he said that the fixation still felt good and was confident that the implant would still perform.The whole incident added 30 minutes onto the procedure.All trocars and sleeves have been kept and decontaminated for inspection and can be returned at your request.The hospital have requested that x3 rigidfix cross pin implants be replaced free of charge as this was an incident that was out of their control.I notice that all x4 implants have different lot numbers which makes me question whether the actual alignment jig instrument is causing the problem and wonder if this also needs returning.Would it be possible to change this free of charge please? i have included the reference and of the instrument that was used in the incident and is still currently in use: description: rigidfix soft tissue guide frame.(b)(4).
|
Product complaint #(b)(4).Depuy synthes is submitting this report pursuant to the provisions of 21 cfr, part 803.This report may be based on information which depuy synthes has not been able to investigate or verify prior to the required reporting date.This report does not reflect a conclusion by fda, depuy synthes or its employees that the report constitutes an admission that the device, depuy synthes, or its employees caused or contributed to the potential event described in this report.Investigation summary = > the complaint device was discarded by the customer therefore, device is not available for a physical evaluation, however three sleeves were returned.Visually the devices are in good condition, no anomalies were discovered from these device components.Unknown if any of the returned sleeves were used.No device information was provided on the three returned sleeves.This complaint is not confirmed.No further information regarding the procedure or the device used has been provided to determine a root cause for the reported failure of jammed.The dhr review indicated that this batch of devices were processed without incident, therefore, there is no evidence of manufacturing anomalies on the records reviewed.Furthermore, a review into the depuy mitek complaints system revealed one other similar complaint for this lot of devices that were released to distribution.And at this time no corrective action is required and no further action is warranted.However, depuy synthes mitek will continue to track any related complaints within this device family as a means of monitoring the extent with which this complaint is observed in the field.Udi(b)(4).Associated medwatches [mr#1221934-2018-50497] [mr#1221934-2018-50496] [mr#1221934-2018-50499].
|