|
Additional information provided in sections d.9., h.3., h.6., and h.11.A review of the device history record traceable to the reported lot number indicates that the product was processed and released according to the 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 deviation and that there no additional complaints regarding the same issue.The returned instrument was received at the investigation site in its inner blister, covered by the tyvek lid foil showing the lot information.The instrument was provided in a closed state and does not show macroscopic signs of damage.There are signs of surgery residues.The returned instrument was visually inspected with the aid of a photomicroscope using various magnifications and was functionally tested.It was found that the forceps could not be actuated, remains in a close state.The fact that the instrument stocks in a closed state indicates that the bonding between tube and sleeve got broken off.As the blister was opened by the customer, the product was handled.Therefore, the point in time when the malfunction occurred can no longer be determined, nor can the strain put on the device be reconstructed.The customer¿s complaint is confirmed, but a root cause for the connection failure cannot be determined conclusively.Since the situation that lead to the damage cannot be reconstructed, a root cause for the customer's reported event cannot 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).
|