Initial reporter fax#: (b)(6).Investigation summary: a physical sample was not available for investigation but bd was provided with a photo of the issue for evaluation.A review of the device history record was performed for the reported lot, 0356289, and no quality issues were found during production.Our quality engineer reviewed the provided photo and observed that the package had the correct manufacturing marks.The seal was completed using thermal transfer and the material line did not leave the production line open.It was also noted that the folding of the surgical field shown in the photo does not follow the specified production standards, concluding that the product was removed from the packaging, handled and returned to the original envelope, but without the original folding condition that could only be replicated on the production line.Therefore, based off the evidence seen in the provided photo the engineer was unable to verify the reported issue.The photo showed evidence that a proper seal was placed and that the package had been handled after release contributing to the reported issue.Investigation conclusion: complaints received for this product and condition will continue to be tracked and trended.Information will be captured on trend reports and monitored.Our business regularly reviews the collected data for identification of emerging trends.Root cause description: the engineer could not identify any manufacturing related issue in the provided photo.For a more thorough investigation the package would have to be returned to the manufacturing facility for analysis.The manufacturing facility has been notified of this incident and the findings.Rationale: collected data are regularly reviewed to identify emerging trends.Based on this, a capa is not needed at this time.
|