A review of the device history record traceable to the reported lot number indicates that the product was processed and released according to the product¿s acceptance criteria.The investigation is concluded based on the sample evaluation outlined below.The sample was received in its inner and outer blister and with the cover foil showing the batch information.The sample evidently shows macroscopic signs of damage, namely that one of the scissor blades is broken off.It shows no signs of surgery residues.The sample was visually inspected with the aid of a photomicroscope under various magnifications.The fractured surface is within the shaft and can therefore not be inspected.There are no abnormalities that would indicate a root cause for the breakage.As the blister was opened by the customer and per the initial report description, the product was handled and used on a patient.The situation in which the malfunction occurred can no longer be determined, nor can the strain put on the device be reconstructed.The customer¿s complaint is therefore confirmed but the root cause cannot be identified by this investigation.It cannot be determined how or where the damage to the sample occurred; therefore a root cause for the customers reported event could not be determined.The exact root cause for the customers reported event is unknown, therefore, specific action cannot be taken.Complaints are reviewed and monitored at regular intervals for adverse trends.No adverse trends have been observed associated with the reported product and event.No action has been identified for this reported event.The manufacturer internal reference number is: (b)(4).
|