|
Additional information was provided in sections d9, h3, h.6 and h.11.The returned instrument was received at the investigation site in its inner and outer blister covered with the tyvek lid foil showing the lot information.The instrument shows no macroscopic signs of damage and no signs of surgery residues.The instrument was visually inspected using a photomicroscope at various magnifications.The visual inspection showed no abnormalities on the soft tip of the product.The returned instrument was then functionally tested regarding the aspiration/irrigation properties.It was noticed that the aspiration/irrigation is not working as expected.After further investigation, it was determined that a metallic object was stuck in the tube.The root cause for this defect could not be identified conclusively but must have occurred during production.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.The root cause is the mechanical failure of the equipment during manufacturing.The metal pin became detached, remained inside the instrument, and thus caused the blockage.At the point of closing this complaint, no further actions are required.Complaint data for all manufactured 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).
|