|
Summary of event: as reported, prior to use during an unspecified procedure, the tip of a cxi support catheter was found to be broken.The device did not make patient contact.Investigation evaluation: reviews of the complaint history, device history record, drawings, instructions for use (ifu), manufacturing instructions, and quality control procedures were conducted during the investigation.A visual inspection and dimensional verification of the complaint device was also conducted.The complaint device was returned to cook for investigation in a prior to use condition.The catheter tip was bent/broken 4mm from the distal tip.Results from the tip measurement of the device were consistent with the reported tip separation.Examination of the returned device and communication with internal personnel suggests that it is possible that the complaint device was manufactured out of specification.Cook completed a review of the device history record (dhr).The dhr for the reported lot recorded no relevant non-conformances.The component lots associated with the reported lot found one relevant non-conformance affecting 26 devices.Although these non-conformances are relevant to the reported failure mode, all non-conforming product was scrapped, there are 100% inspections to capture this non-conformance.As adequate inspection activities have been established, and there are no other lot related complaints that have been received from the field, cook has concluded this to be a singular incident.There is no evidence of additional nonconforming devices from the complaint lot in house or in the field.The instructions for use (ifu) provides the following information to the user related to the reported failure mode: how supplied: ¿upon removal from package, inspect the product to ensure no damage has occurred.¿ the information provided upon review of the dmr, dhr, ifu, and investigation of the returned device suggests that there is evidence the device was manufactured out of specification, but that there are no more nonconforming devices in house or out in the field.Based upon the available information, cook has concluded that a manufacturing deficiency at the subassembly level likely contributed to this incident.Field action was assessed for the failure, however, no field action was warranted as there is no increase in occurrence.The responsible operators were retrained to the applicable steps to prevent this failure from occurring again in the future.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.
|