|
Blank fields on this form indicate the information is unknown, unavailable, or unchanged.Additional information: b5.This report includes information known at this time.A follow up report will be submitted should additional relevant information become available.This report is required by the fda under 21 cfr part 803.This report is based on unconfirmed information submitted by others.Neither the submission of this report nor any statement made in it is intended to be an admission that any cook device is defective or malfunctioned; that a death or serious injury occurred; or that any cook device caused or contributed to; or is likely to cause or contribute to a death or serious injury if a malfunction occurred.
|
|
Blank fields on this form indicate the information is unknown, unavailable, or unchanged.Correction: d4 (primary udi number), h6 (annex a and annex g).Investigation ¿ evaluation.It was reported the ncompass nitinol tipless stone extractor was found to be damage -folded and did not open- prior to use.The user noted the issue upon opening the package.The device did not make patient contact.The procedure was completed using another same-type device.The patient did not require any additional intervention due to this occurrence or experience any adverse effects due to this occurrence.Additional information received detailing the device was received by the distributor in good condition and was stored according to the mexican nom.Upon receipt of the device by the customer, the device was noticed to be broken during preparation for the procedure.Reviews of documentation including the complaint history, device history record (dhr), quality control procedures, specifications, manufacturing instructions (mi), and instructions for use (ifu), as well as a visual inspection of the returned device, were conducted during the investigation.One device was returned to cook for evaluation.Upon visual inspection, the basket sheath noted to be wrinkled and damaged in two places near proximal end of the support 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 related discrepancies.These devices were scrapped as part of the manufacturing process.Cook has determined that the complaint failure mode is unlikely to be related to the failed devices in production based on the individual nature of the manufacturing process and inspection.A review of complaint history records found no other related complaints associated with the failure mode for the complaint device lot.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 supplied with the device did not provide any information related to the reported issue.Based upon the available information, inspection of the returned device, and results of the investigation, cook has concluded that the cause of 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 to a death or serious injury if a malfunction occurred.
|