A device history record (dhr) review revealed no discrepancies that may have contributed to a complaint of this failure mode.All quality assurance testing performed during manufacturing was acceptable.The quality assurance review of the visual, physical and dimensional evaluation results indicated that the product met specification requirements.In addition, all dhrs are reviewed for accuracy prior to product release.The sample consisted of a mahurkar catheter 11.5fr x 13.5cm that is different than the product reported.The red adapter showed signs of use.Visual inspection was performed and it was observed that red adapter was detached from the extension and the extension was broken.A crack was found on the arterial adapter on the thread pitch area.The adapter presents marks that indicate the use of some instrument.Manufacturing performed 100% inspection for cracked adapters per procedure and the incoming inspection was performed.The instructions for use (ifu) state that the customer should perform an inspection before using the device.Additionally, the adapter became damaged after being in use for an undetermined amount of time.The reported condition has been confirmed.The evidence provided is not enough to relate this event to the manufacturing operations.The most possible root cause can be considered as misuse; the instructions for use were not followed causing adapter over tightening.No complaint triggers or trends were identified.This event will be addressed through a corrective and preventative action (capa) and health hazard evaluation (hhe), no additional actions were required.It must be noted that in-process controls such as personnel training, incoming quality acceptance testing for raw material, 100% in process visual inspection and visual acceptance sampling are in place to prevent nonconforming product from leaving the manufacturing operations.This complaint will be used for tracking and trending purposes.
|