|
(b)(4).Complaint sample was evaluated and the reported event was confirmed.Visual examination of the returned product exhibits signs of repeated use and a portion of the box feature has fractured off.Device history record (dhr) was reviewed and no discrepancies were found.Fractured tasps were analyzed by optical microscopy revealing hackle marks and river lines in the case of bending overload; and hackle marks, river lines and striations were found in the case of low cycle fatigue culminating in a bending overload failure type.In addition to the visual and optical microscopy analysis, a review of the dhf and dfmea was performed.Ongoing complaint monitoring confirms that the rate of instrument fracture is within the expected risk profile as specified in the dfmea.A definitive root cause cannot be determined.If any further information is found which would change or alter any conclusions or information, a supplemental report will be filed accordingly.Zimmer biomet will continue to monitor for trends.
|