Model Number 8360-10 |
Device Problems
Break (1069); Mechanical Problem (1384)
|
Patient Problems
No Known Impact Or Consequence To Patient (2692); No Clinical Signs, Symptoms or Conditions (4582)
|
Event Date 07/30/2020 |
Event Type
malfunction
|
Manufacturer Narrative
|
Supplier: (b)(4).As a result of an adverse trend for devices exhibiting failure at the thumb-loop assembly joint, the malfunction has been investigated by the supplier, (b)(4), and a corrective action (scar) was performed.(b)(4) evaluated multiple batch # starting with m.(b)(4) re-designed the push rod fixture, increasing the clearance, to ensure that the fixture is appropriately stressing the entire soldering joint.Upon implementing the new fixture, it was verified that the new fixture does not hang up on the soldering as the old one did when testing a returned non-conforming sample.In addition to this scar, a capa was opened by aesculap inc.For further evaluation of the design transfer of this device.Additional information / investigation results will be provided in a supplemental report, if available.
|
|
Event Description
|
It was reported that there was an issue with a prestige grasper.It was noted that the shaft of the grasper was separate from the weld.Additional information was not provided.
|
|
Manufacturer Narrative
|
Manufacturer evaluation: aesculap inc.Previously reported that a supplier corrective action request (scar) was initiated due to an adverse trend observed for devices exhibiting failure at the thumb-loop assembly joint.The supplier evaluated the malfunction by looking at devices with a lot number beginning with "m." as a result of their findings, the push rod fixture was redesigned to increase the clearance, which ensured that the fixture appropriately stressed the entirety of the soldering joint.Upon implementing the new fixture, the supplier tested returned non-conforming samples, and verified that the soldering no longer hung up on the new fixture, as had been observed on the previous one.The complaint device was returned to the manufacturer for physical evaluation.A visual examination was performed which confirmed separation at the proximal weld.All returned non-conforming devices exhibited the same weld failure; a clean break occurred from the solder to the rotator housing.An investigation of the device manufacturing records was conducted by the manufacturer for the lot # of the device in question.No non-conformances were reported.All device history records (dhr) are reviewed and released according to documented procedures and a device is not released if it does not meet requirements or is nonconforming.Additionally, historical scrap rates were reviewed with no increase observed in scrap related to the complaint issue.In addition to the redesign of the soldering fixture, the supplier reviewed the work instruction for the torch soldering operation and identified improvement opportunities.The original work instruction was used to better define the soldering process with a more focused emphasis on the following: equipment startup and shutoff operations, clear imagery of acceptable soldered subassemblies, and clarified cleaning operations for components prior to soldering.A second dedicated work instruction was implemented to better define the attribute inspection criteria for the brazing process used for the solder between the thumb loop and rotator block.The investigation into the cause of the reported problem was able to confirm the failure mode of a proximal weld failure.This event likely occurred due to inadequacies in the defined production process which limited the device performance.Therefore, the most probable root cause is considered to be manufacturing related.In addition to a supplier corrective action request (scar) being initiated, a corrective action/preventive action (capa) was opened by aesculap inc.For further evaluation of the design transfer of this device.
|
|
Event Description
|
No updates.
|
|
Search Alerts/Recalls
|
|