|
The returned devices were sent to the manufacturing location for further evaluation.Material: to manufacture this instrument was used ti-6al-4v, titanium grade 5 alloy (unsr56400).The chemical composition of which and quality certificate are attached.Workload test: for testing, instruments from the same lots (2204 and 2205) were used.They were subjected to the internal testing procedure on a tensile testing machine (the instrument handle was fixed motionless, and a force was applied to the working part along the instrument axis until reaching the breaking point.Each time the instrument's neck rupture occurred when the workload force was above 245n (55 pound-force).Conclusion: this is a microsurgical instrument, designed to work with microvascular and neural tissue, which does not imply the application of workload forces exceeding 105n (23.6 pound-force).Based on the purpose of the instrument, the rma report images and the internal workload testing, it was concluded that the instrument met quality standards and was not used for its intended purpose.If instrument was used as intended, the damage to the instrument proves there was some kind of mechanical force applied that caused the severe physical deformation prior to use.These delicate instruments are not malleable.They are designed for high precision microsurgical procedures.There should not be any dings, dents, or bends on these items.When the items look as these do, they should no longer be used.This type of instrument damage can be caused by drops and/or improper handling during the sterilization process, causing unforeseen instrument deformation which could get worse upon use.Based on the manufacturing locations evaluation, it can be determined that the root cause can be attributed to user error.This can be seen as the final report.If additional information is obtained that alleges any additional patient involvement or additional information pertinent to the investigation a follow up report will be submitted.
|