The device was not returned to the manufacturer for physical evaluation.Additionally, no on-site evaluation of the unit was performed and no parts were returned for failure analysis.Therefore, the investigation was not able to confirm a device issue that could be associated with the reported event.An investigation of the device manufacturing records was not able to be conducted by the manufacturer as no lot # was provided by the complainant.However, 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.A definitive conclusion regarding the complaint incident cannot be reached without a physical examination of the complaint device.However, based on prior evaluations of complaint devices reported with a failure mode of distal/proximal weld failure/separation, this event likely occurred due to inadequacies in the defined production process which limited the device performance.Aesculap inc.Opened a corrective action/preventive action (capa) for further evaluation of the design transfer of this device.
|