Upon receiving the device involved in the mdr event from the distributor, nakanishi conducted a failure analysis of the returned device [report no.(b)(4)].These activities are described in more detail below.Methodology used: nakanishi examined the device history record and the repair history for the subject z45l device [02160038].There were no problems observed during manufacturing or testing noted in the dhr.There were also no repair history records since the device was shipped.Nakanishi conducted a visual inspection of the returned device and observed a gap between the head assembly and the body.Nakanishi disassembled the handpiece and performed a visual inspection of the internal parts.Nakanishi observed the following: the drive shaft retainer was loose and the head was removed easily.The head cap and bearing of the rear side were abraded.Nakanishi took photographs of all the disassembled parts and kept them in the investigation report no.(b)(4).Nakanishi reassembled the handpiece and observed no gap between the head and the body of the device.Nakanishi then conducted temperature testing of the device in the following manner: temperature sensors were attached to the exterior of the device at various test points.This included the point most proximal to the patient (testing point (1)) and points further toward the distal end of the device (testing points (2) through (4)).The test setup was prepared to take temperature measurements at all points simultaneously, including a reference measurement at ambient room temperature.Nakanishi attached a thermocouple (sensor to measure temperature) to each of the testing points.Nakanishi rotated the device's motor at 40,000min-1, which is the maximum rpm for the motor that drives the handpiece (168,000min-1 for the handpiece), with water spray, and measured the exothermic response.Nakanishi measured the temperature rise of the returned handpiece set at 168,000min-1 (motor revolution 40,000min-1).Nakanishi observed no abnormal temperature rise at the test points during the planned 5-mimute evaluation period.Conclusions reached based on the investigation and analysis results: nakanishi did not identify the exact cause, but nakanishi considers the possibility from many years of experience, the combination of a strong impact on the device together with cutting vibration could result in the reported head loosening/separation.In order to prevent a recurrence of the head loosening/separation, nakanishi took the following actions: nakanishi reviewed the operation manual and reconfirmed the clarity and understandability of the instructions.Nakanishi will report the above evaluation results to the distributor and directed the distributor to remind the user of the importance of maintenance as instructed in the operation manual.
|