|
Device evaluation summary: since no serial number was available on the returned devices, it was not possible to determine which device corresponded to the right-side breast implant, therefore, both products were analyzed.The device b was returned to mentor for evaluation.Mentor then conducted a visual inspection, leak testing, and microscopic examination of the returned device.Visual analysis of the returned device revealed that no damage or anomalies were observed on the sm mpps dv 500cc breast implant.Leak testing was performed, in accordance with mentor procedures, and it identified two tears on the posterior view, measuring both approximately 0.1 cm.In addition, no other leak sites were detected during the analysis.Microscopic examination was performed on the edges of the ruptures, and parallel striations were found in the whole area of both tears (a and b).Parallel striations are consistent with markings made by a sharp object perforating the implant shell.Based on the information currently available, microscopic examination of the returned product indicates that the implant could have been damaged during or subsequent to implantation.The product insert data sheet cautions to not allow cautery devices or sharp instruments, such as scalpels, suture needles, hypodermic needles, hemostats, adson forceps or scissors to contact the device during the implantation or other surgical procedures.As part of mentor's quality process, all devices are manufactured, inspected, and released according to approved specifications.Based on the results of this investigation, it was determined that the product met the manufacturing release criteria: no corrective and preventive action (capa) is required now.Additional complaint information monitoring for potential safety signals is conducted through complaint trending as part of post market surveillance.Manufacturer¿s reference number: (b)(4).
|