|
Correction: d4 (primary udi number).Investigation ¿ evaluation: it was reported the sterile packaging of the hiwire nitinol hydrophilic wire guide was found not sealed prior to an unknown procedure.A second wire was opened to complete the procedure successfully.The patient did not require any additional procedures due to this occurrence.According to the initial reporter, the patient did not experience any adverse effects due to this occurrence.Reviews of documentation including the complaint history, device history record (dhr), quality control (qc) procedures, instructions for use (ifu), as well as visual inspection of the returned device, were conducted during the investigation.The complaint device was returned in open package with label.Visual inspection confirmed that the device did not have an end/bottom seal.Additionally, a document-based investigation evaluation was performed.A review of the device master record (dmr) concluded that sufficient inspection activities are in place to identify this failure mode prior to distribution.A review of the device history record (dhr) found no anomalies related to the reported failure mode.A search of the complaint database by cook found no other complaints reported for the lot.Based on the available information, cook has concluded that there is no evidence suggesting nonconforming product exists either in house or in the field.Cook also reviewed product labeling.The ifu packaged with the device contains the following in relation to the reported failure mode: 'how supplied: - supplied sterilized by ethylene oxide gas in peel-open packages.Intended for one-time use.Sterile if package is unopened or undamaged.Do not use the product if there is doubt as to whether the product is sterile.' the complaint device is assembled by a supplier to cook who carried out an investigation in additional to cook.The returned packaged device was reviewed by the supplier who confirmed the pouch presented no presence of a bottom seal.Neither side of the package films presented any evidence of heat sealer application.Supplier investigation found the device history records of the specimen device does not present any indication of manufacturing defect or anomaly that could have impacted on the event as reported.Also, the supplier has a 100% visual inspection in place to identify this failure mode prior to shipment, and the final inspection test was determined to be acceptable.Based on the available information, inspection of returned device, and the results of the investigation, cook has concluded that the cause of the complaint is manufacturing related.The supplier has opened a corrective and preventive action to address the issue.The appropriate personnel have been notified.Cook will continue to monitor for similar complaints.Per the quality engineering risk assessment, no further action is required.This report is required by the fda under 21 cfr part 803 and is based on unconfirmed information submitted by others.Neither the submission of this report nor any statement contained herein is intended to be an admission that any cook device is defective or malfunctioned, that a death or serious injury occurred, nor that any cook device caused, contributed to, or is likely to cause or contribute to a death or serious injury if a malfunction occurred.
|