|
Additional information - this mdr is being submitted to include the below: h6: investigation results under type of investigation, investigation findings, investigation conclusions.H11: investigation summary.Per revision 21 of procedure (b)(4), a child investigation is not required to document the dhr review for a type 2 reportable complaint.However, the child was created to allow the parent record to advance to review and summary.Since it was created, the dhr review was documented within the child.Complaint investigation results: a complaint investigation has been initiated under complaint investigation child record (b)(4).The batch 5406384, in question was manufactured at the reynosa site.Device history record (dhr) review: the lot 5406384 was manufactured according to the work instruction (wi) version 13 and packaged in the machine multivac 10 on 31-oct-2022, with a total of (b)(4) units.Gluing tube the sub-assembly, gluing tube of the lot 5409108 was manufactured according to the wi version 8 and manufactured in the machine lc02, on 02-nov-2022, with a total of (b)(4) units.The sub-assembly, gluing tube of the lot 5406922 was manufactured according to the wi version 8 and manufactured in the machine lc01, on 26-oct-2022, with a total of (b)(4) units.Review of the dhr showed that a non-conformance (nc) was raised due to planned deviation: use a different cartridge presentation for glue.This nc is not related to claimed malfunction.Conclusion summary of complaint investigation: one nonconformance (nc) was raised and found unrelated to the reported malfunction code, no further actions are required.This complaint will not require further root cause investigation nor corrective and preventive action (capa) plan.Therefore, this issue will be monitored through the post market surveillance activities.
|