|
Additional information is provided in sections d.9, h.3, h.6 and h.11.A review of the device history record (dhr) traceable to the reported lot numbers, indicates that the reported product was processed and released according to the reported 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 relevant deviation and that there are no additional complaints associated with it.The investigation is completed based on the sample evaluation documented below.The returned instrument was received in its inner blister covered with the tyvek lid foil showing the lot information.The instrument shows no macroscopic signs of damage, but it is evident that the forceps is in a closed state when the handle is not actuated.The product shows signs of surgery residues.The instrument was visually inspected with the aid of a photomicroscope using various magnifications and was functionally tested.During the inspection, it was confirmed that the forceps gets stuck in a closed state and can only get opened again by manually pushing down the shaft, indicating the bonding connection between the shaft and the sleeve got broken.This confirms the customer¿s complaint.As the blister was opened by the customer the product was handled.However, it is not possible to determine what situation could have caused the malfunction, and no root cause can be identified conclusively.No root cause for the customers reported event could be determined, since the situation that lead to the instrument failure cannot be reconstructed.The exact root cause for the customer's reported event is unknown, therefore, specific action cannot be taken.Complaints are reviewed and monitored at regular intervals for adverse trends.No adverse trends have been observed associated with the reported product and event.No action has been identified for this reported event.The manufacturer internal reference number is: (b)(4).
|