Additional narrative: patient information is not available for reporting.Device is an instrument and is not implanted or explanted.Complainant part is expected to be returned for manufacturer review/investigation, but has yet to be received.(b)(4).The investigation could not be completed; no conclusion could be drawn as no product was received.Device history review: manufacturing location: (b)(4) - manufacturing date: november 22, 2013.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.Device 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.
|
A device evaluation investigation was performed: one application instrument for sternal zipfix (part number 03.501.080, lot number 8719722) was received with the complaint that the handle of the instrument stayed in the closed position.The complaint condition is unconfirmed for the zipfix application instrument as it functions as intended.There were no issues found with the returned device.The returned part was determined to be suitable for the intended use when employed and maintained.Further evaluation at the chu shows that this device is part of the sternal zipfix system and it is used to tension and cut the zipfix implants.Proper use and maintenance is addressed in the technique guide.The returned device was received intact and in very good condition.There are only a few wear marks on the surface of the device.When the cutting mechanism is locked, the trigger compresses and releases as intended.When the cutting mechanism is unlocked, the trigger is locked as intended so that the device would not cut with the implant under tension.Thus, the complaint condition for this device is unconfirmed and cannot be replicated.A review of the current design drawing was performed.During the investigation no product design issues or discrepancies were observed that may have contributed to the complaint condition.The returned part was determined to be suitable for the intended use when employed and maintained as recommended.As an issue with the device was not identified and/or confirmed, review to the specific risk assessment is not applicable.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.
|