|
(b)(4).The customer provided two images for analysis.The complaint of a damaged dilator tip was confirmed by visual analysis of the images, which show a damaged dilator and kinked guidewire.Definite signs of use were observed.The customer also returned one dilator and one guidewire for investigation.Signs of use were observed inside the dilator body and along the guidewire.Visual analysis of the dilator revealed widening at the distal tip.Microscopic examination revealed evidence of white stress marks.The appearance of the widening is consistent with damage due to undue force applied unintentionally by the user during an attempted insertion.The dilator length measured 3", which is within the specification limits of 2 3/4" - 3 1/4" per the dilator product drawing.The dilator inner diameter at the distal tip measured 0.024", which is within the specification limits of 0.022" - 0.024" per the dilator product drawing.A lab inventory guidewire (outer diameter measured 0.021") was inserted through the dilator tip.Despite the damage to the tip, the guidewire was able to pass completely through the dilator extrusion.Performed per ifu statement, "use tissue dilator to enlarge tissue tract to the vein as required.Follow the angle of the guidewire slowly through the skin." r & d and manufacturing have been consulted regarding investigations of this nature.They stated that various factors could contribute to the observed damage to the dilator tip, including the manufacturing process and/or undue force applied unintentionally by the user during an attempted insertion.A device history record review was performed, and no relevant findings were identified.The ifu provided with the kit informs the user, "do not use excessive force when introducing guidewire or tissue dilator as this can lead to vessel perforation, bleeding, or component damage." the report of a damaged dilator tip was confirmed through complaint investigation.Visual analysis revealed that the dilator tip was widened and slightly misshapen.Despite the damage, all relevant dimensional and functional requirements were met, and a device history record review did not reveal any relevant findings to suggest a manufacturing issue.Based on the customer report that the defect occurred during use and the appearance of the damage, the root cause cannot be determined as it is unknown if the damage occurred before or after the customer handled.Teleflex will continue to monitor and trend for reports of this nature.
|