Adverse event problem: methods code: communication/interviews (4111).Investigation ¿ evaluation; a visual inspection and functional testing of the returned device was conducted.A document based investigation was also performed including a review of complaint history, device history record, the instructions for use, and quality control data.One device was returned for investigation.The returned packaging confirms the reported complaint device lot number.Inspection of the returned device confirmed the device was returned in used condition.A functional test was performed on the open device by inflating the balloon with tap water.A leak was confirmed in the proximal end of the balloon material.Under magnification grasper marks were observed on the balloon material.One of the grasper marks punctured the balloon causing it to leak.A review of the device history record found no non-conformances related to the reported failure mode.A review of complaint history records shows no other complaints associated with the complaint device lot.Because there are no related non-conformances, adequate inspection activities have been established, there is objective evidence that the dhr was fully executed, and no other lot related complaints that have been received from the field, it was concluded that there is no evidence that nonconforming product exists in house or in field.The instructions for use (ifu), provides the following information to the user related to the reported failure mode: how supplied upon removal from the package, inspect the product to ensure no damage has occurred.A review of relevant manufacturing documents was conducted.It was concluded that the device aspect in question was visually/functionally inspected by quality control and no related gaps in production or processing controls were noted.The complaint was confirmed based on customer testimony and evaluation of the returned device.Based on the available information, the most likely cause of the event was determined to be unintended use error.Per the quality engineering risk assessment, no further action is warranted.Cook medical has notified the appropriate personnel and will continue to monitor this device via the complaints database for similar complaints.This report is required by the fda under 21 cfr part 803.This report is based on unconfirmed information submitted by others.Neither the submission of this report nor any statement made in it is intended to be an admission that any cook device is defective or malfunctioned; that a death or serious injury occurred; or that any cook device caused or contributed to; or is likely to cause or contribute to a death or serious injury if a malfunction occurred.
|