Skip to content

Integra® Jarit® 277274TIRecalls & reported problems

Integra Lifesciences Production Corporation · Integra® Jarit® Rhoton-Type Ball Dissector, 7-1/2", No. 16, Angled 90°, 3mm, Titanium · Class 1

Adverse event reports
1
Deaths reported
0
Injuries reported
1
Recalls naming it
0

Summary

The FDA's MAUDE database contains 1 adverse event report that list this exact device (DI 10381780208525), received between Oct 16, 2025 and Oct 16, 2025 — classified as 1 injury.

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. How this data works · Data updated Oct 13, 2026.

Reports received per month

Nov 2023: 0 reportsDec 2023: 0 reportsJan 2024: 0 reportsFeb 2024: 0 reportsMar 2024: 0 reportsApr 2024: 0 reportsMay 2024: 0 reportsJun 2024: 0 reportsJul 2024: 0 reportsAug 2024: 0 reportsSep 2024: 0 reportsOct 2024: 0 reportsNov 2024: 0 reportsDec 2024: 0 reportsJan 2025: 0 reportsFeb 2025: 0 reportsMar 2025: 0 reportsApr 2025: 0 reportsMay 2025: 0 reportsJun 2025: 0 reportsJul 2025: 0 reportsAug 2025: 0 reportsSep 2025: 0 reportsOct 2025: 1 reportsNov 2025: 0 reportsDec 2025: 0 reportsJan 2026: 0 reportsFeb 2026: 0 reportsMar 2026: 0 reportsApr 2026: 0 reportsMay 2026: 0 reportsJun 2026: 0 reportsJul 2026: 0 reportsAug 2026: 0 reportsSep 2026: 0 reportsOct 2026: 0 reports2024202520261
Last 36 months. The most recent month may be incomplete.

Most reported problems

Device problems

  • Break1

Patient problems

  • Foreign Body In Patient1

Recent adverse event reports

The 1 most recent of 1 reports, in the reporter's own words as published by the FDA.

  • InjuryOct 16, 2025Break; Break

    A FACILITY REPORTED THAT THE RHOTON-TYPE BALL DISS 71/2 90D TT (277274TI) INSTRUMENT BROKE AT A 90-DEGREE ANGLE AT THE TIP AND WAS LEFT IN THE PATIENT. ACCORDING TO ADDITIONAL INFORMATION RECEIVED FROM THE STERILE PROCESSING SUPERVISOR, IT WAS NOTED THAT THE NEUROSURGERY RESIDENT AND THE OPERATING ROOM TEAM WHO WORKED ON THE CASE STATED THAT THE BROKEN PART WAS NOT RECOVERED, AND THE FLUOROSCOPY X-RAY THAT WAS PERFORMED DID NOT DETECT ANY BROKEN PIECES. IT WAS ALSO CONVEYED THAT THE PATIENT WAS UNDER GENERAL ANESTHESIA DURING THE PROCEDURE, AND THE OPERATING ROOM TEAM TRIED TO RETRIEVE THE BROKEN PIECE AFTER "COMMITTING A SIGNIFICANT AMOUNT OF TIME TRYING TO TAKE THE BROKEN PIECE OUT, " BUT IT WAS UNSUCCESSFUL. ACCORDING TO THE NEUROSURGERY RESIDENT, THE PIECE MIGHT HAVE BEEN SUCTIONED OUT WHEN HE WAS DISSECTING TO REMOVE IT, AND THE PATIENT WAS NOTIFIED OF THE INCIDENT." A DIFFERENT INSTRUMENT THAT WAS AVAILABLE WAS USED TO COMPLETE THE SURGERY. POSTOPERATIVELY, THE PATIENT HAD THE SURGERY ON (B)(6) 2025, WAS DISCHARGED ON (B)(6) 2025, AND HAD A RE-ADMISSION DUE TO A COMPLAINT OF NECK PAIN ON (B)(6) 2025 AND DISCHARGED ON (B)(6) 2025.

    Patient problems: Foreign Body In Patient

    MAUDE report 23318716 ↗

Other INSTRUMENT, MICROSURGICAL devices

All INSTRUMENT, MICROSURGICAL devices →

Sources: FDA GUDID, MAUDE and Medical Device Recalls via openFDA. openFDA data is not validated for clinical or regulatory use.