The perforator was returned for evaluation: failure analysis - the perforator unit was inspected using the unaided eye.The unit was heavily soiled on the flutes, there was no "eo" label and visible tool marks on the sleeve."ifu" testing procedure was performed with no failure observed.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.In the failure analysis that was performed, the returned unit was found to work as intended, and met all acceptance criteria.The complaint could not be verified through failure analysis.Root cause - the root cause is undetermined and was unable to be confirmed in the complaint evaluation.A device history record review could not be performed, however a risk assessment and trending were performed as part of the evaluation.Product was received for analysis and the investigation could not confirm the complaint.The risk remains acceptable per the risk analysis.
|