|
Additional information is provided in sections d.9, h.3, h.6 and h.11.The returned instrument was received in its inner and outer blister, covered with the tyvek lid foil showing the lot information.However, the inner blister was not correctly positioned in the outer blister.The product evidently shows macroscopic signs of damage, namely that one of the forceps arms is broken off.There are no signs of surgery residues.The instrument was visually inspected with the aid of a photomicroscope under various magnifications.The fractured surface on the stump does not show any abnormalities that would indicate a root cause for the breakage.The situation in which the malfunction occurred can no longer be reconstructed, nor can the strain put on the device be determined.Therefore, the customer¿s complaint is confirmed, but the root cause cannot be identified by this investigation.A review of the device history record traceable to the reported lot numbers, indicates that the reported product was processed and released according to the reported product¿s acceptance criteria.A non-conformance based review of the lot number was performed and did not reveal any potential contributing factors to the reported complaint.Since it was reported that the defect occurred during use of the instrument outside of its intended use, the root cause is identified as ""external - use error"".No actions are required since the defect occurred during use for a purpose not covered by its intended use, which is communicated in the product's dfu.The manufacturer internal reference number is: (b)(4).
|