|
A review of the device history record traceable to the reported lot numbers, indicates that the reported product was processed and released according to the reported product¿s acceptance criteria.A review of the database for the non-conformance events and the complaints showed that the given lot number was not concerned by any relevant deviation and that there are no additional complaints associated with it.The investigation is completed based on the sample evaluation documented below.The returned product was received at the investigation site in the outer blister and the cover foil showing the lot information.The inner blister, which ensures that the product is kept safe from damage during the shipment, was not used.The product shows obvious macroscopic signs of damage.Specifically, the scissor blades as well as the metal tube are deformed and bent, respectively.The returned product exhibits some surgery residues.The instrument was visually inspected with the aid of a photomicroscope using various magnifications.The visual inspection confirmed the macroscopically noticeable damage and displayed the deformation of the scissor blades in detail.The level of damage as well as the missing inner blister suggest that the deformation of the scissor blades was caused during the shipping process from the complainant to the investigation site.However, the point in time when the described damage occurred can no longer be determined conclusively nor can the situation that led to it be reconstructed.The customer¿s complaint is confirmed as the returned device shows significant deformation, but a root cause for the reported issue cannot be determined.It cannot be determined how or where the damage to the sample occurred.Therefore, the root cause for the customer's reported event could not be determined.The exact root cause for the customer's reported event is unknown, therefore, specific action cannot be taken.The manufacturer internal reference number is: (b)(4).
|