Udi: (b)(4) or (b)(4).A dhr review could not be completed because the lot number was not reported and not legible on the returned product label.Failure analysis: the perforator unit was inspected using the unaided eye.The unit was heavily soiled from surgery, had visible tool marks on the sleeve.Label was destroyed and could not be read.Ifu testing was performed.The inner and outer sleeves were fused, likely due to organic material and were not easily freed.Testing included: applying adequate pressure on the perforator point, ensuring engagement occurs as the hudson end is rotated.When engagement occurs, placing thumb pressure on the perforator point to ensure a smooth, positive spring action.Ensuring the hudson end rotates smoothly within the perforator body when the unit is in the disengaged position.Functional testing was performed using the same protocol it underwent at finished goods testing prior to release.The unit was found to perform as intended and fulfilled the acceptance criteria.It is noted that it took two drilled holes to free the inner and outer drill, and once freed the remaining holes were drilled as intended.The complaint could not be verified through failure analysis.The root cause is undetermined and was unable to be confirmed in the complaint evaluation.Product was received for analysis and the investigation could not confirm the complaint.
|