| Model Number |
1661G |
| Medical Device Problem Code |
Break (1069)
|
| Health Effect - Clinical Code |
No Consequences Or Impact To Patient (2199)
|
| Date of Event |
01/28/2020
|
|
Type of Reportable Event
|
Malfunction
|
|
Additional Manufacturer Narrative
|
|
(b)(4).Date sent to the fda: 02/25/2020.A manufacturing record evaluation was performed for the finished device lot pdb779, and no non-conformance's were identified.Attempts have been made to retrieve the device.To date the device has not been returned.If the device or further details are received at a later date a supplemental medwatch will be sent.Additional information was requested and the following was obtained: lot #? pdb779.Please explain or provide details of what was problem noticed with the product ? the needle could not be passed through the tissue smoothly from the 1st stitch.When the sales rep checked the product, it seemed that the needle tip had been crushed.When was it noticed- pre-op ? / intra-op ? / post-op ? no further information is available.Any patient consequences? no further information is available.
|
| |
|
Event or Problem Description
|
|
It was reported that a patient underwent an unknown orthopedic surgery on (b)(6) 2020 and suture was used.During the procedure, the needle could not be passed through the tissue smoothly from the 1st stitch.It seemed that the needle tip had been crushed.There were no adverse consequences to the patient.No additional information was provided.
|
| |
|
Additional Manufacturer Narrative
|
|
Product complaint # (b)(4).Date sent to the fda: 04/03/2020.H3 evaluation: a failed suture needle was submitted for fractographic evaluation to assess the fracture mode of the failure.A fracture was observed at the tip of the needle.One side of the needle was received, the mating fracture surface was not provided for this evaluation.A microscope was used to examine the fracture surfaces and surrounding area of the needle.The fracture surfaces were examined in multiple locations in order to determine the fracture mode.The evaluation of the sample revealed the fracture was composed of microvoid coalescence, which is evidence of a ductile overload failure.Mechanical damage observed coincidental to the fracture provides additional evidence that the failure was induced by mechanical deformation leading to ductile overload.This was a ductile fracture.The manufacturing records were reviewed, and the manufacturing/packaging criteria were met prior to the release of this batch.The evidence of this examination indicates that the breakage occurred at the tip of the needle during use due to tensile overload.There is no evidence of any material flaw or defect that would cause premature failure.
|
| |
|
Search Alerts/Recalls
|