|
It was reported, during an in vitro fertilization (ivf): embryo transfer procedure, the customer opened a guardia¿ access embryo transfer catheter, and when the inner tube was aspirating the culture fluid, foreign matter appeared on the inner wall of the tube.This issue was discovered prior to patient contact and the device was not used.The customer replaced it with a new product to complete the procedure.The complainant has not reported any adverse effects on the patient due to this occurrence.
|
|
Correction: h6: annex a.Investigation ¿ evaluation: it was reported, during an in vitro fertilization (ivf) - embryo transfer procedure, the customer opened a guardia¿ access embryo transfer catheter, and when the inner tube was aspirating the culture fluid, foreign matter appeared on the inner wall of the tube.This issue was discovered prior to patient contact and the device was not used.The customer replaced it with a new product to complete the procedure.The complainant has not reported any adverse effects on the patient due to this occurrence.Reviews of the complaint history, device history record (dhr), instructions for use (ifu), manufacturer¿s instructions (mi), and quality control (qc) procedures were conducted during the investigation.Visual inspection of the returned complaint device was also conducted.One device was returned for investigation.The transfer catheter was returned with a clear unknown substance multiple places along the length of the transfer catheter tubing.Review of the work order confirmed medical fluid was applied to the inner wall of the transfer catheters on 01nov2023 during the wiring step of the manufacturing instructions.It is possible this dried substance is medical fluid, however as the issue was found after the customer introduced fluid inside of the device during the procedure, it is also possible this substance was the culture media the customer introduced during the procedure.Cook has concluded that the device was manufactured to specification.Additionally, a document-based investigation evaluation was performed.A review of the device master record (dmr) concluded that sufficient inspection activities are in place to identify this failure mode prior to distribution.A review of the device history record (dhr) found no related non-conformances reported for this incident.A complaint history database search showed no other related complaints associated with the failure mode for the complaint device lot.Because there are 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 field.Cook also reviewed product labeling.The ifu supplied with the device did not provide any information related to the reported issue.Based upon the available information, inspection of the returned device, and results of the investigation, cook has concluded that the cause for the complaint could not be established.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.
|