|
The device, used in treatment, was returned for evaluation.There was a relationship found between the returned device and the reported incident.A review of the device history records for the device showed there were no indications to suggest that the product did not meet manufacturing specification or would not be able to perform as intended.A complaint history review concluded this was an isolated event.A review of the instructions for use found do not contact metal objects while activating the wand.Damage to the tip may result.A review of risk management files found that the reported failure was documented appropriately.Visual inspection of the device showed a complete detachment of the electrode tip.The device was connected to a known good controller, which revealed that while the device's tip was detached, the wand was able to electrically activate with no issues.The complaint was verified as the device's tip was detached.Factors, which may have contributed to the reported complaint include: hitting the device tip against a hard surface such as an insertion cannula.Using the device as a lever to enlarge surgical site.Mechanical displacement of tissue through applied force.Activating the device above recommended settings for prolonged periods of time.There were no indications that would suggest that the device did not meet product specifications upon release into distribution.
|