|
(b)(4).Updated fields: b4, b5,d9, g3, g6, h2, h3, h6 (type of investigation, investigation findings and investigation conclusions), h11.The device was returned to the factory for evaluation on 12/13/2024.An investigation was conducted on 01/15/2025.A visual inspection was conducted.Signs of clinical use and evidence of blood was observed.There were no visual defects observed on the intact c-ring.The bipolar blades were observed to be intact.The cutter blade was observed to be extended.There were no visual defects observed on the intact cutter blade.The toggle was manipulated to retract and extend the cutter blade.The cutter blade would not retract.Based on the returned condition of the device, and the no specific failure reported, the analyzed failure "mechanical problem " was observed.An engineer evaluation was conducted.A visual inspection was conducted.The device showed signed and clinical use.Upon further investigation, it was noted that when the rocker ((b)(4)) was actuated the blade on the bisector subassembly ((b)(4)) was not moving.This was noted as not a normal function of the device.The device was disassembled and it was observed that the pullrod ball ((b)(4)) was detached from the rocker arm ((b)(4)).It was also noted that there was an obstruction impeding the full retraction of the blade.Conclusion: the pullrod ball detaching from the rocker arm was due to the obstruction impeding the travel of the blade.Impeding travel of the blade correlates to more force needing to applied to the rocker and can potentially lead to the pullrod ball popping out of the rocker arm socket.The lot # 3000416465 history record review was completed.There was an ncmr, rework, or deviations documented for the reported lot number.Based on the dhr/lhr review results, it was determined that there is no relation between the batch manufacturing process and the none specific reported failure.
|