|
(b)(4).The customer returned an opened picc kit including one peel-away sheath with dilator assembly for analysis.Signs of use were observed on the sheath and dilator.Visual analysis revealed that the distal end of the sheath tip was damaged.No other defects were observed with the dilator.The sheath length from the tabs to the distal tip measured 4", which is within the specification limits of 3 7/8"-4 1/8" per peel-away product drawing.The sheath outer diameter measured 0.097", which is within the specification limits of 0.093"-0.099" per peel-away extrusion product drawing.The sheath inner diameter at the distal tip could not be accurately measured due to the nature of the damage.The peel-away sheath and dilator were functionally tested per the product instructions-for-use (ifu).The ifu provided with this kit instructs the user, "ensure dilator is in position and locked to hub of sheath." the dilator was removed, reinserted back into the sheath, and locked into the sheath hub.The dilator was able to pass through the sheath tip with little to no resistance.R & d and manufacturing were previously consulted regarding investigations of this nature.They stated that various factors could contribute to the observed damage to the sheath tip, including the sheath tip manufacturing process and/or undue force applied unintentionally by the user.Due to the possibility that manufacturing contributed to this damage, they will further investigate this issue.A device history record review was performed, and there was one potential finding.A non-conformance initiated for 34r23m0011 in regard to "peel-away sheath tears incorrectly".The failure mode of this complaint is the same as/relevant to the non-conformance identified.The ifu provided with the kit informs the user, "do not use excessive force when introducing guidewire, peel_away sheath over tissue dilator, or tissue dilator as this can lead to venospasm, vessel perforation , bleeding , or component damage." the report of peel-away body damage was confirmed through complaint investigation of the returned sample.Visual analysis revealed that the sheath tip was damaged.Despite the damage, the sheath and the dilator met all relevant functional requirements.Various factors could contribute to the observed damage to the sheath tip, including the sheath tip manufacturing process and/or undue force applied unintentionally by the user, therefore, the root cause is undetermined.A non-conformance was initiated to further investigate potential root causes at the manufacturing site.Teleflex will continue to monitor and trend for reports of this nature.
|