Additional information provided in d.9., h.3., h.6., and h.10. two opened probes were received with tip protectors, in trays.Sample #1 was visually inspected and found to be non-conforming with the needle slightly bent orange/brown foreign material on the port face.The sample was then functionally tested for actuation and cut and was found to be conforming for both functional tests.Sample #2 was visually inspected and found to be non-conforming with the needle slightly bent orange/brown foreign material on the port face.The sample was then functionally tested for actuation and cut.The sample was found to be conforming for cut and non-conforming for actuation.Sample #2 was then 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.The inner cutter was observed to be severely bent and gouge marks were observed at several locations along the cutter.The sample was retested for actuation with the probe driver and was able to actuate.The initial actuation test failed due to an interference within the probe and once the interference (needle assembly) was removed the probe was able to actuate.The product was processed and released according to the product¿s acceptance criteria.The complaint evaluation does not confirm that either of the returned probes had a cut failure.The evaluation indicated that sample #2 had an actuation failure.The cut functionality of sample #2 was conforming, however, the observed actuation failure could have caused the probe to not cut at the time the reported event was observed.The most likely cause for the actuation failure is from the bent needle and bent inner cutter.A bent needle can impede the movement of the cutter shaft.This interference is present as observed from visual condition of the inner cutter.After the probe was disassembled (bent needle assembly removed), the probe was able to actuate.The exact root cause of the bent needle and bent inner cutter cannot be determined from this evaluation.The most likely root cause is handling at any point after the probe was shipped from the manufacturing site, including use during surgery.The reported cut failure was not confirmed and an exact root cause for the bent needle and the bent inner cutter in sample #2 was not determined from this evaluation, therefore, no specific action with regard to this complaint was taken.Probes are 100% visually inspected and tested for actuation, aspiration, and cut during manufacturing.Any non-conformances found are removed from the lot and scrapped.The manufacturer internal reference number is: (b)(4).
|