|
Reporter is a j&j employee.Investigation summary: investigation flow: functional (will not tension/ tighten) visual inspection; torque-limiting handle 3nm (part.No: 03.632.204, lot.No: 6395603-15, qty: 1) was returned and received at us cq.The device shows normal wear without any damage.Functional test: functional test was performed on the returned device at (b)(6).The highest torque of the device measured during calibration testing was 3.64 nm which was not within the specified torque range of the device of 3.1 nm - 3.5 nm as per the 10324757 rev.7.Hence, the torque test failed high.Refer to the attached test report.Can the complaint be replicated with the returned device? yes.Dimensional inspection: dimensional inspection of the torque limiting handle cannot be performed as the internal components of the device were inaccessible.Document/specification review: the following drawings were reviewed: torque limiting handle 4.5 ao quick coupling, 3.0nm for matrix lateral connector: 03_632_204 rev.B and rev.G.Synthes loaner set product specific inspection and verification instructions: 103243757 rev.7.No design issues or discrepancies were noticed.Complaint confirmed? no.Investigation conclusion the complaint condition was confirmed for the torque-limiting handle 3nm (part.No: 03.632.204, lot.No: 6395603-15).A definitive root cause cannot be determined for the complaint condition.Failed torque might be the possible root cause for the complaint condition.During the investigation, no product design issues, or discrepancies were observed that may have contributed to the complaint condition.Based upon these results, no corrective and/or preventative action is proposed.Additional monitoring for any potential safety signals will be conducted through complaint trending and other post-market safety surveillance activities.Therefore, it has been determined that no corrective and/or preventive action is proposed.Device history lot: part #: 03.632.204, synthes lot number: 6395603-15, supplier lot #: 6395603-15, release to warehouse date: 14-jul-2010, supplier: (b)(4).Device history review: review of the device history record(s) showed that there were no issues during the manufacture of this product, and any sub-components, which would contribute to this complaint condition.Device was used for treatment, not diagnosis.If information is obtained that was not available for the initial medwatch, a follow-up medwatch will be filed as appropriate.
|