One opened probe was received for evaluation.The returned sample was visually inspected and found conforming.The sample was then functionally conforming for actuation, aspiration and cut.The sample was found conforming for actuation and aspiration and was non-conforming for cut.The probe was disassembled and the components inspected.No/minimal wear was observed on the inner cutter when compared to the degree of wear based on continuous actuation of the probe visual standard photos.Gouge marks were observed at the bend area and cutting edge of the inner cutter.A review of the device history record traceable to the reported lot number indicates that the product was processed and released according to the product¿s acceptance criteria.A complaint history examination for device component lots traceable to the reported lot number indicates there is one additional complaint associated with the component lots for the reported issue.The complaint evaluation did not confirm that the probe had an actuation issue, however, the evaluation did confirm that the probe had a cut issue.The most likely root cause for the poor cutting is the observed damage/wear to the cutting edge of the inner cutter of the probe.A damaged/worn inner cutter can decrease the quality of the cut performed by the probe.How and when the inner cutter of the probe became damaged cannot be determined form this evaluation.No specific action with regard to this complaint was taken by the manufacturing site because the exact root cause for the cut issue cannot be determined from this evaluation.All probes are 100% tested for actuation, aspiration, and cut during manufacturing.Complaints are reviewed and monitored at regular intervals for any significant adverse trends.No additional action is required at this time.The manufacturer internal reference number is: (b)(4).
|