|
As reported, a cook® single-use holmium laser fiber was attached to the laser, but the laser did not read the fiber.An attempt to tighten the fiber further onto the machine was made and it was at this point that the red hub on the fiber connector broke off.The fiber was removed from the laser and a new fiber was used to complete the unspecified procedure with no incidents.Upon return evaluation of the device, the fiber tip was found to be broken.
|
|
Initial reporter occupation: uro coordinator.Device has been returned and preliminary evaluation has been performed, however, our investigation is ongoing and device evaluation summary will be included in our follow up report once our investigation has been completed.This report includes information known at this time.A follow up report will be submitted should additional relevant information become available.
|
|
Summary of event: as reported, a cook® single-use holmium laser fiber was attached to the laser, but the laser did not read the fiber.An attempt to tighten the fiber further onto the machine was made and it was at this point that the red hub on the fiber connector broke off.The fiber was removed from the laser and a new fiber was used to complete the unspecified procedure with no incidents.Upon return evaluation of the device, the fiber tip was found to be broken.Investigation evaluation: reviews of the complaint history, device history record, manufacturing instructions, instructions for use (ifu), and specifications were conducted during the investigation.A visual inspection and functional test of the complaint device was also conducted.The complaint device was returned to cook in open packaging.The device was returned with the red hub detached and the laser blue sheath is broken and smashed.Using a light source, an aiming beam was observed at the distal tip.A review of the device history record found no non-conformances related to the reported failure mode.A review of complaint history records shows no other related complaints associated with the complaint device lot.Because there were no related non-conformances, adequate inspection activities have been established, there is objective evidence that the dhr was fully executed, and no other lot related complaints that have been received from the field, it was concluded that there is no evidence that nonconforming product exists in house or in the field.Cook has conducted a review of the product manufacturing specifications in response to this incident.It was determined that the current controls are sufficient to identify this failure mode by inspecting the device prior to device distribution.The instructions for use (ifu) provides the following information to the user related to the reported failure mode: upon removal from package, inspect the product to ensure no damage has occurred.The information provided upon review of complaint file, device history record, complaint history, and quality control documents did not provide evidence to support that the device was manufactured out of specification.The user did not report the device was damaged at the distal tip.As the user is instructed to inspect the device for damage upon removal from package, and based on the extent of the damage, cook has concluded the damage to the device tip is most likely due to the repackaging and return of the device outside of the protective packaging tray.The appropriate personnel have been notified and cook will continue to monitor for similar events.Per the quality engineering risk assessment, no further action is required.This report is required by the fda under 21 cfr part 803 and is based on unconfirmed information submitted by others.Neither the submission of this report nor any statement contained herein is intended to be an admission that any cook device is defective or malfunctioned, that a death or serious injury occurred, nor that any cook device caused, contributed to, or is likely to cause or contribute to a death or serious injury if a malfunction occurred.
|