|
Additional information is provided in sections d.9, h.3, h.6 and h.11.The product under investigation is not a serviceable device.Therefore, a service record review was not performed.A laser probe was returned for testing on this investigation.A manufacturing device history record (dhr) review was performed prior to product release to ensure that the product was manufactured in compliance with the device master record.Based on the assessment, the product met release criteria.A non-conformance based review of the lot number was performed.There were no relevant contributing factors identified.A review for complaints reported against this lot number was performed.All relevant complaints found, were reviewed as part of this investigation.The laser probe was received for testing.A visual assessment of the returned sample revealed a damaged articulating tip.The returned sample was connected to a calibrated system and was successfully recognized.A fit check was performed with a trocar and no resistance was found.However, as to how or when it became damaged remains inconclusive.The root cause of the reported event can be attributed to the articulating tip.However, as to how or when it became damaged remains inconclusive.The root cause of the reported event can be attributed to the articulating tip.However, as to how or when it became damaged remains inconclusive.Manufacturer will continue to monitor data for evidence of adverse trending and take further action, as appropriate.The manufacturer internal reference number is: (b)(4).
|