Catalog Number XFO082001 |
Device Problems
Break (1069); Fracture (1260); Detachment of Device or Device Component (2907)
|
Patient Problem
Alteration In Body Temperature (2682)
|
Event Date 03/28/2019 |
Event Type
malfunction
|
Manufacturer Narrative
|
Once the investigation has been completed any additional information will be reported in a supplemental report.
|
|
Event Description
|
During foot surgery using the anchorage 1, lisfranc plate.The surgeon had drilled 4 holes, on the fifth the 2.0mm drill bit broke in the bone.The drill bit was deep in the bone so it was declared safe to leave in the bone by the surgeon.Surgical delay was minimal as the surgeon knew the drill could not be removed.
|
|
Event Description
|
During foot surgery using the anchorage 1, lisfranc plate.The surgeon had drilled 4 holes, on the fifth the 2.0mm drill bit broke in the bone.The drill bit was deep in the bone so it was declared safe to leave in the bone by the surgeon surgical delay was minimal as the surgeon knew the drill could not be removed.
|
|
Manufacturer Narrative
|
Device evaluation is still pending.A review of the device history did not reveal any abnormalities.No corrective actions are required at this time.A review of the labeling did not indicate any abnormalities.No indications of material, manufacturing or design related problems were found during the investigation.Upon completion of evaluation, additional information will be provided in a supplemental report.
|
|
Event Description
|
During foot surgery using the anchorage 1, lisfranc plate.The surgeon had drilled 4 holes, on the fifth the 2.0mm drill bit broke in the bone.The drill bit was deep in the bone so it was declared safe to leave in the bone by the surgeon.Surgical delay was minimal as the surgeon knew the drill could not be removed.
|
|
Manufacturer Narrative
|
The reported event could be confirmed, since the device was returned for evaluation and matches the reported failure mode.Based on investigation, the root cause was attributed to be due to the normal wear of the device.The device was manufactured almost 4 years prior to the reported event.The device inspection of the parts of the drill showed that the device has some scratches and traces of wear.Moreover, signs of extensive re-sterilization/re-cleaning and marks of rust, color fading were also noticed.Furthermore, the breakage reported can be confirmed, as the tip of the device is broken.The microscope images showed a shiny fracture surface, a sign that the two broken parts of the device rubbed against each other.This observation proves that the fracture is due to the fatigue of the material.Most likely, an excessive cyclic loading was applied to the device leading to a final breakage.The device was in use for almost 4 years before the reported incident.Therefore, normal wear could have lead to such an event.
|
|
Search Alerts/Recalls
|