|
Visual inspection was performed on the returned device.The reported difficulty could not be replicated in a testing environment due to the condition of the returned device.Return device analysis noted a separation proximal to the support skive/wire/bayonet.Production record and corrective and preventative actions (capa) reviews were performed and revealed no indication of a product quality issue.Additionally, a review of the complaint history identified no other similar complaints from this lot.Based on the reported information and the observations from the returned analysis, a definitive cause for the reported difficulty or noted separation on the returned device could not be determined.Possible factors that can contribute to difficulty removing the mandrel/stylet may include, but not limited to, damage during protective sheath removal, removal technique or mishandling.In this case a conclusive cause for the reported complaint could not be determined since limited information was provided and the complete device and component were not returned for analysis.Possible factors that may contribute to a separation may include, but not limited to, inadvertent mishandling of the device, interaction with the anatomy and/or physician applies excessive force against resistance.In this case, a conclusive cause for the noted separation could not be determined since limited information was provided and no additional information was provided during follow up.There is no indication of a product quality issue with respect to the design, manufacture, or labeling of the device.
|