Arthrex® AR-4158P-14BRecalls & reported problems
Arthrex, Inc. · DynaNite PIP - Bent 14 w/inserter only · Class 2 · Implant
Data updated Oct 16, 2026 from official FDA records · Editorial policy
- Adverse event reports
- 1
- Deaths reported
- 0
- Injuries reported
- 0
- Recalls naming it
- 0
Summary
The FDA's MAUDE database contains 1 adverse event report that list this exact device (DI 00888867310070), received between Sep 3, 2025 and Sep 3, 2025 — classified as 1 malfunction.
The most frequently reported specific device problem is “Break” (1 report).
Reports come from manufacturers, hospitals and patients and are not verified by the FDA. A report does not prove the device caused the event, and counts can't be used to compare devices or estimate failure rates. What reports can and can't tell you · How this data works · Data updated Oct 16, 2026.
Reports received per month
Most reported problems
Device problems
- Break1
- Fracture1
Patient problems
- Bone Fracture(s)1
- Failure of Implant1
Recent adverse event reports
The 1 most recent of 1 reports, in the reporter's own words as published by the FDA.
MalfunctionSep 3, 2025Break; Fracture; Break; Fracture
ON 07/11/2025, A FACILITY REPRESENTATIVE REPORTED THAT A PATIENT ENROLLED IN THE CLINICAL STUDY TITLED PROSPECTIVE STUDY OF HAMMER TOE FIXATION USING AN INTRAMEDULLARY NITINOL IMPLANT, EXPERIENCED MULTIPLE COMPLICATIONS FOLLOWING DEVICE IMPLANTATION. THE INITIAL EVENT OCCURRED ON (B)(6) 2023, WHEN THE PATIENT SUSTAINED A STRESS FRACTURE OF THE OPERATIVE TOE. THE STRESS FRACTURE WAS DOCUMENTED AFTER THE SURGICAL PROCEDURE INVOLVING THE INTRAMEDULLARY NITINOL IMPLANT. FOLLOWING THIS, THE SUBJECT ALSO EXPERIENCED TWO SIGNIFICANT FALLS, RESULTING IN EMERGENCY ROOM VISITS ON (B)(6) 2023 AND (B)(6) 2024. THE CAUSAL RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN THE IMPLANT AND THESE SUBSEQUENT INCIDENTS IS CURRENTLY UNDETERMINED. ADDITIONAL INFORMATION WAS RECEIVED ON 8/11/2025. THE INITIAL SURGERY TOOK PLACE ON (B)(6) 2023 USING AN AR-4158P-14B DYNANITE PIP. THE PATIENT REPORTED NO MEMORY OF A SPECIFIC INCIDENT LEADING TO THE ISSUE. AT THE TIME, THE PATIENT WAS STILL IN A SHORT BOOT, SO NO ADDITIONAL STABILIZATION WAS NECESSARY. THE IMPLANTS REMAIN IN THE PATIENT; HOWEVER, BY THE 1-YEAR FOLLOW-UP VISIT ON (B)(6) 2024, ONE ARM OF THE IMPLANT WAS NOTED TO BE BROKEN. NO REVISION SURGERY WAS PERFORMED. THE PATIENT C
Patient problems: Bone Fracture(s); Failure of Implant
MAUDE report 22950956 ↗
Other PIN, FIXATION, SMOOTH devices
- RIGIDFIX 210133Medos International Sàrl · PIN, FIXATION, SMOOTH91 reports
- SMART TOE ST0A-16PStryker GmbH · PIN, FIXATION, SMOOTH1 recall5 reports
- SMART TOE ST0-19PStryker GmbH · PIN, FIXATION, SMOOTH1 recall2 reports
- SMART TOE ST0-22PStryker GmbH · PIN, FIXATION, SMOOTH1 recall0 reports
- SMART TOE ST0XS-11Stryker GmbH · PIN, FIXATION, SMOOTH1 recall0 reports
- HammerTube™ System P40-002-0275-SParagon 28, Inc. · PIN, FIXATION, SMOOTH1 recall0 reports
- ARROW-LOK 1Arrowhead De LLC · Pin, Fixation, Smooth1 recall0 reports
- ARROW-LOK 1Arrowhead De LLC · Pin, Fixation, Smooth1 recall0 reports
Sources and updates
- Device record: FDA GUDID, file dated Oct 13, 2026 · View this device in AccessGUDID ↗
- Adverse event reports: FDA MAUDE, file dated Oct 14, 2026 · each report above links to its original FDA record
- Recalls: FDA Medical Device Recalls, file dated Oct 16, 2026
- Page last rebuilt: Oct 16, 2026. Data downloaded through openFDA, which notes it is not validated for clinical or regulatory use.
How reports and recalls are matched · Editorial policy · Report an error on this page