|
Additional information provided in d.9., h.3., h.6.And h.11.One opened probe was received, with a tip protector, in a tray.The sample was visually inspected and found to be nonconforming with clear color foreign material on the needle.The sample was then functionally tested for actuation, aspiration and cut.The sample was found to be conforming for actuation and aspiration and nonconforming for cut.The probe was disassembled and the components inspected.Excessive wear observed on inner cutter when compared to the degree of wear based on continuous actuation of the probe visual standard photos.Gouge marks observed at bend area, cutting edge and several locations along the inner cutter.A review of the device history record traceable to the lot number obtained from the device¿s radio frequency identification tag, indicates that the reported product was processed and released according to the reported product¿s acceptance criteria.The photo was reviewed by the manufacturing site.Photo show a label with reported lot number.Reported issue cannot be confirmed from photo.The investigation conducted a non-conformance review of the reported lot number.No deviations were identified, and all corresponding production release specifications defined in the device master record were met.Based on the evaluation of the information and materials received, the investigation concluded that the root cause of the reported event is user related.The complaint evaluation confirms that probe had a cut failure and does not confirm an aspiration failure.The root cause for the poor cutting is the observed gouge marks.The probe was disassembled, and the components inspected.The wear observed on inner cutter when compared to the degree of wear based on continuous actuation of the probe visual standard photos is consistent with excessive use classification.Excess usage of the probe will wear and damage the inner cutter such that the cutter function becomes poor, bent, or does not function at all.Per the dfu (direction for use), the vitrectomy probe is verified for 20 minutes of use at maximum cut speed.No further investigative or manufacturing actions are warranted at this time as it appears that the observed cut failure was due to excessive use of the probe by the user and probe was conforming for aspiration.Per the dfu, the vitrectomy probe is verified for 20 minutes of use at maximum cut speed.All probes are 100% visually inspected and tested for actuation, aspiration, and cut during manufacturing.Complaints are reviewed and monitored at regular intervals for any significant adverse trends.Complaint data for all products is reviewed monthly to monitor for adverse trends.During the last review, adverse trends were observed for the reported product and event combination.Quality assurance has reviewed this complaint and will continue to monitor data for evidence of adverse trending and take further action, as appropriate.No further action warranted at this time.The manufacturer internal reference number is: (b)(4).
|