Reportedly there was no patient involvement.Device is an instrument and is not implanted/explanted.(b)(6).Release to warehouse date: july 12, 2010.Supplier: (b)(6).No non-conformance reports were generated during production.Review of the device history record(s) showed that there were no issues during the manufacture of the product that would contribute to this complaint condition.A product investigation was completed: a visual inspection under 5x magnification, functional test, drawing review, and dimensional analysis were performed as part of this investigation.A definitive root cause cannot be identified with the limited complaint details.No new, unique or different patient harms were identified as a result of this evaluation.The design is adequate for its intended use when used and maintained as recommended, it did not contribute to the complaint condition.The device was returned broken at the distal tip by a torsional force.The broken fragment was not returned.It is unlikely that the device contributed to the complaint condition.Device was used for treatment, not diagnosis.If information is obtained that was not available for the initial medwatch, a follow-up medwatch will be filed as appropriate.
|