|
Additional information has been provided in sections d.9, h.3, h.6 and h.11.The returned instrument was delivered in its inner blister, the outer blister and the tyvek foil were missing.The product shows sign of surgery residues.The returned instrument was visually inspected with the aid of a photomicroscope using various magnifications.The visual inspection showed no abnormalities or defects on the tip.The device was then functionally tested, and it was found that the forceps closes and reopens properly upon actuating the instrument.The opening of the grasping arms was then tested with the relevant inspection equipment, as well the holding force and the instrument could be passed through the cannula.The returned instrument met the specifications.Therefore, the customers complaint could not be confirmed.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.A root cause for the customer's reported event could not be determined because the returned product met manufacturer¿s specifications.No action was taken as the returned instrument met specifications for tests performed in relation to the reported event.Complaint data for all manufacturer products is reviewed monthly to monitor for adverse trends.During the last review, no adverse trends were observed for the reported product and event combination.The complaint data will continue to be monitored for evidence of adverse trending and further action will be taken, as appropriate.No further action warranted at this time.The manufacturer internal reference number is: (b)(4).
|