|
E1: phone number (b)(6), postal code (b)(6).H3 - device has been returned and preliminary evaluation has been performed, however, our investigation is ongoing and device evaluation summary will be included in our follow up report once our investigation has been completed.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.
|
|
It was reported, while preparing the stent from a universa firm ureteral stent set for insertion, the stent separated.Another stent was used to complete the unspecified procedure.As reported, the patient did not experience any adverse effects or require any additional procedures due to this occurrence.
|
|
Investigation ¿ evaluation.It was reported, while preparing the stent from a universa firm ureteral stent set for insertion, the stent separated.Another stent was used to complete the unspecified procedure.As reported, the patient did not experience any adverse effects or require any additional procedures due to this occurrence.A visual inspection of the returned device was conducted.A document based investigation was also performed including a review of complaint history, device history record (dhr), the instructions for use (ifu), manufacturing instructions, and quality control procedures.One universa firm ureteral stent was returned for evaluation in opened package with label.A visual exam notes that the proximal coil was separated 2.0 cm from the last ink mark.There was also a tear in the separated coil that starts at the last side port and continues through the tip.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 device history record showed no discrepancies related to the reported failure mode.A review of complaint history records showed no other complaints associated with the complaint device lot.Based on the available information, cook has concluded that the device was manufactured to specification and 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 contains the following in relation to the reported failure mode: ¿precautions: do not force components during removal or replacement.Individual variations of interaction between stents and the urinary system are unpredictable.¿ ¿how supplied: upon removal from package, inspect the product to ensure no damage has occurred.¿ based on the information provided, inspection of the returned device, and the results of the investigation, the cause of the separation based on the appearance of the returned device seems to be due to improper tether removal.Per the quality engineering risk assessment, no further action is required.The appropriate personnel have been notified, and we will continue to monitor for similar complaints.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.
|