|
Blank fields on this form indicate the information is unknown, unchanged, or unavailable.Description of event: it was reported that during the distributor's inspection process for the flexor high-flex ansel guiding sheath, an unknown particle was noted inside the packaging.This device did not make patient contact.Investigation ¿ evaluation a document based investigation was performed including a review of complaint history, device history record, documentation, the instructions for use, manufacturing instructions, and quality control data.The complaint device was not returned; therefore, no physical examinations could be performed.However, a document based investigation evaluation was performed.There is no evidence to suggest the product was made out of specification.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 are 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 field.The instructions for use (ifu), provides the following information to the user related to the reported failure mode: how supplied supplied sterilized by ethylene oxide gas in peel-open packages.Intended for one-time use.Sterile if package is unopened and undamaged.Do not use the product if there is doubt as to whether the product is sterile.Store in a dark, dry, cool place.Avoid extended exposure to light upon removal from package, inspect the product to ensure no damage has occurred.A review of relevant manufacturing documents was conducted.It was concluded that the device aspect in question was visually/functionally inspected by quality control and no related gaps in production or processing controls were noted.The investigation has found that the most likely cause for this complaint is manufacturing, specifically a quality control deficiency.However, as there are no other complaints on the lot or non-conformances, the incident was most likely isolated to a single unit.The quality controls in place were also reviewed, it was concluded that there are sufficient inspection steps in place to prevent this occurring in the future.Per the quality engineering risk assessment, no further action is warranted.Cook will continue to monitor this device via the complaints database 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.
|