|
Additional information provided in d.9., h.2., h.3., h.6.And h.11.No technical inquiries were received from the customer.One opened probe with tip protector in a bubble bag with a tray label was received for the report.The sample was visually inspected and found to be nonconforming with orange/brown foreign material on the welded cap and body needle bent at stiffener.The sample was then functionally tested for actuation, aspiration, and cut.The sample was found to be nonconforming for actuation, conforming for aspiration and nonconforming for cut.No abnormal sound was heard.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, area that was bent and cutting edge along the inner cutter.A review of the device history record traceable to the lot number obtained from the device¿s radio frequency identification (rfid) tag, indicates that the reported product was processed and released according to the reported product¿s acceptance criteria.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 complaint evaluation does not confirm the probe had an aspiration failure or abnormal noise, the evaluation confirms the probe had an actuation and cut failure.The aspiration function of the probe was conforming; however, the observed actuation failure could have caused the cutter to stay in the port of the needle long enough to obstruct aspiration flow at the time the reported event was observed.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 directions for use (dfu), the vitrectomy probe is verified for 20 minutes of use at maximum cut speed.The root cause for the no actuation and cutting is the observed gouge marks.The exact root cause of the bent needle cannot be determined from this evaluation.The most likely root cause is handling at any point after the probe was shipped from the manufacturing site.No further investigative or manufacturing actions are warranted at this time as the reported abnormal noise was not confirmed, and the observed actuation and cut failures were due to excessive use of the probe by the user.The exact root cause for the bent needle could not be determined from this evaluation.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.Any non-conformances found are removed from the lot and scrapped.Receipt of additional relevant information or supporting materials will prompt a re-evaluation of the complaint investigation.Complaint data for all company 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).
|