|
Additional information provided in h.6.And h.11.A sample was not received at the manufacturing site for evaluation.Therefore, the condition of the product could not be verified.A review of the device history record traceable to the reported lot number, indicates that the reported product was processed and released according to the reported product¿s acceptance criteria.The photos were reviewed by the manufacturing site.Photo 1 shows a probe with the broken tip near the stiffener.Photo 2 shows a pak label, reported product and lot information is confirmed.The reported issue of broken probe is confirmed from the photo review.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.The photo confirms the reported issue of cutter broke; however, since a sample was not returned and based on the evaluation of the information and materials received, the investigation was unable to identify the root cause or origin of the reported event.As the root cause and its origin are inconclusive, further investigative or manufacturing actions are not warranted at this time.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.Receipt of additional relevant information or supporting materials will prompt a re-evaluation of the complaint investigation.Complaint data for all 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.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).
|