|
The product under investigation is not a serviceable device.Therefore, a service record review was not performed.However, the laser probe was returned for this investigation for evaluation.A non-conformance-based review of the batch/lot/serial number was performed and did not reveal any potential contributing factors to the reported complaint.A manufacturing device history record (dhr) review was performed prior to product release to ensure that the product was manufactured in compliance with the device master record.Based on the assessment, the product met release criteria.A review for complaints reported against this lot/batch/serial number was performed.A potentially relevant complaint was found and reviewed as part of this investigation.The laser probe was received for this investigation.An initial visual assessment of the returned sample revealed no visible nonconformities.The laser probe was connected to a calibrated system, which successfully recognized the laser probe.Both the aiming beam power and laser beam power were found to meet specifications.The aiming beam image and laser beam image were found to meet specifications.Under a microscope, the sample was found to have excess adhesive on the cannula-nitinol junction.Trocar testing was performed, and the sample was found to get stuck when inserted into a trocar.The outer diameter of the cannula was found to be nonconforming (oversized).Based on the results of this investigation, the reported event was replicated.The root cause of the reported event is attributed to excess adhesive on the cannula-nitinol junction.Manufacturer will continue to monitor data for evidence of adverse trending and take further action, as appropriate the manufacturer internal reference number is: (b)(4).
|