The complainant was unable to provide the suspect device lot number; therefore, the lot expiration and device manufacture dates are unknown.(b)(6).(b)(4).Investigation results: the returned orise proknife was analyzed, a visual evaluation was performed and it was noted that the electrode had detached from the distal tip and was not returned.No other issues were noted.Based on all available information and the condition of the returned device, it is likely that procedural factors, such as the length of time used, power settings required, handling technique, and/or tissue composition resulted in the electrode detachment.The investigation concluded the most probable root cause is adverse event related to procedure.A review of the manufacturing documentation for this device revealed that no anomalies or deviations related to the event occurred during manufacturing.A labeling review was performed and, from the information available, this device was used per the directions for use (dfu) / product label.
|