|
It was reported, the ncircle delta wire tipless stone extractor was unable to fully close and retract during ureteroscopy with laser lithotripsy procedure.However, this did not affect the basket´s performance.The basket was tested prior to use and functioned properly.The stone was removed with the complaint device and the case ended with a stent placement.No section of the device remained inside the patient's body.The patient did not require any additional procedures due to this occurrence.The complainant has not reported any adverse effects on the patient due to this occurrence.
|
|
Correction: d4 investigation ¿ evaluation it was reported, the ncircle delta wire tipless stone extractor was unable to fully close and retract during ureteroscopy with laser lithotripsy procedure.However, this did not affect the basket´s performance.The basket was tested prior to use and functioned properly.The stone was removed with the complaint device and the case ended with a stent placement.No section of the device remained inside the patient's body.The patient did not require any additional procedures due to this occurrence.The complainant has not reported any adverse effects on the patient due to this occurrence.Reviews of documentation including the complaint history, drawing, device history record (dhr), quality control procedures, manufacturing instructions (mi), and instructions for use (ifu), as well as a visual inspection and functional test of the returned device, were conducted during the investigation.One ncircle delta wire tipless stone extractor was returned to cook for evaluation.Upon visual inspection, it was noted the basket formation extended past the tip of the basket sheath approximately 3mm with the handle in the closed position.During a functional test of the device, the handle actuated the basket formation.The basket formation could not be manually retracted into the basket sheath when the handle was disassembled.The tip of the basket formation appeared to be too big to retract into the basket sheath.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 dhrs for the reported complaint device lot revealed no recorded non-conformances relevant to the failure mode.A complaint history search identified no other events reported for the related failure mode.Based on the available information, cook has concluded that the device was manufactured to specification and 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 does not contain information relevant to the reported event.Based on the information provided, inspection of the returned device, and the results of the investigation, cook has concluded a cause for this event could not be established.The appropriate personnel have been notified.Cook will continue to monitor for similar complaints.Per the 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 toa death or serious injury if a malfunction occurred.
|