A customer reported that no aqueous humor outflow was confirmed 2 months after implanting a shunt to a patient's eye.The shunt was explanted and trabeculectomy was performed.No data regarding product identity was received i.E.No lot or serial number were indicated for the event; therefore, the device history record (dhr) could not be reviewed.The product was returned for analysis and the reported complaint was confirmed.In addition an unknown material seen on the shunt back plate.After slicing the shunt, the lumen was seen to be open, therefore, there is no indication for a manufacturing related factors that could cause the blockage.During production, 100% final inspection is being performed on the entire batch, including visual inspection and inner illumination.If a blockage would be noticed, the product would have been rejected immediately.Having said that, one may conclude, that the blockage was formed after the product had left the manufacturing plant.The root cause is external - related to patient condition / non-product factors, however, the blockage could have been caused by many different reasons during and after the clinical procedure.The blockage does not seem to be product related since two lumens, on either side of the restriction unit were found and no welding penetrations were found.Therefore, there is no evidence for an inherent defect that might have caused the event, and the root cause is seem to be external - related to patient condition / non-product factors.(b)(4).
|