The complainant was unable to provide the suspect device lot number; therefore, the lot expiration and device manufacture dates are unknown.(b)(4).Investigation results: the returned orise proknife was analyzed, a visual evaluation was performed and no damages or additional defects were found.A functional evaluation noted that the thumb slider could easily be adjusted for electrode extension, but no electrode tip extended out.The ceramic tip was removed, and the electrode tip had become separated from the electrode body and was not returned.No other issues were noted.The reported complaint was confirmed.The electrode tip became impossible to deploy because it had become separated from the electrode body.Based on all available information and the condition of the returned device, it is most likely that heat exposure for a long period of time can promote damage in materials such as metal.The dfmea lists electrode burn (hot spot) as a potential cause for electrode assembly detachment.That being said, there are no time restrictions or warnings of the tip falling off after long periods of use.The investigation concluded the most probable root cause is adverse event related to procedure.A device history record (dhr) review was unable to be performed as the lot number is unknown.However, a ship history review was performed to identify the most probable lots, and a dhr review on the most probable lots did not identify any deviations within manufacturing/service processes that could have contributed to the event.A labeling review was performed and, from the information available, this device was used per the directions for use (dfu) / product label.
|