|
This report has been identified as b.Braun medical internal report number (b)(4).One (1) pab empty unit from j3k694/s5904-52 was received for evaluation.The unit was intact, and the ports had not been accessed.Through visual observation, foreign matter was observed.Optical images of the particles/defects were obtained, and their lengths were measured.The particles were extracted from the bags placed in the fourier transform infrared spectroscope for analysis.The results are shown below.- particle 1: measured 672um and was identified as polypropylene.The defect was inside the material of the pab bag.The defect was on the outside surface of the pab bag and would not have been in contact with the solution.- particle 2: measured 380um and was identified as polypropylene.The defect was fully embedded in the pab bag material and would not have been in contact with the solution.A review of our non-conformance system database found no related or similar discrepancies during the production of the batch.The batch record was reviewed, and the batch met and passed all release criteria and tests.Additionally, twenty (20) retain units were inspected by a certified inspector.Visual inspection of twenty (20) retain units performed by a certified inspector revealed no particulate matter.Based on the investigation results and available documentation, the possible source of particle 1 was due to machine, which was fixed.Human error also contributed as the 100% pm inspector may have not inspected 100% due to added tasks.A preventive action (retraining) was already performed to mitigate this incident.Regarding particle 2, the pab empty container (catalog no.S5904-52) uses a film material that is manufactured by third party vendor.A supplier corrective action request (scar) was issued to the vendor to investigate the embedded particle issue.Through the vendor investigation it was determined that the pm met the allowable particle size per specification.The embedded particle defect does not impact the function and integrity of the material provided to b.Braun.This type of defect was considered inherent to the manufacturing process of the film and is considered to be a cosmetic defect.We will maintain this report for further references and continue to monitor other reports for similar occurrences.If any additional pertinent information becomes available, a follow up will be submitted.
|