Event description: as reported, the operator opened the package of a modified novy cornual cannulation set and discovered the catheter tip to be damaged.An image of the device provided by the initial reporter appears to show part of the device tip having peeled away from the catheter.The procedure was completed using another new device.There were no reported adverse effects to the patient due to this occurrence.Investigation ¿ evaluation a visual inspection of the returned device was conducted.A document based investigation was also performed including a review of complaint history, device history record, and quality control data.One modified novy cornual cannulation set was returned for investigation.The catheter tip was confirmed to be damaged.It appeared to have been externally scraped and torn, with plastic dangling off of the end.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 were 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 the field.A review of relevant manufacturing documents was conducted.It was concluded that the device aspect in question was functionally inspected by quality control and no notable gaps in production or processing controls were noted.There is no indication that a design or process related failure mode contributed to the reported event.Current controls for manufacturing are in place to assure functionality and device integrity prior to shipping.A review of production and quality documentation did not observe any specific issues with current manufacturing or quality controls that may have contributed to this incident.The returned device appears to have been damaged, but cook is unable to determine a definitive source of the event.The risk analysis for this failure mode was reviewed, and it was determined that no additional risk mitigating activity is required.We will continue to monitor 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.
|