|
Additional information provided in sections d.9, h.3, h.6 and h.11.The returned instrument was received in its outer blister, the inner blister which protects the device during shipment was not used and the tyvek foil was missing as well.The product shows macroscopic signs of damage, namely that both forceps arms are broken off and the tube is significant bent.There are sign surgery residues.The instrument was visually inspected with the aid of a photomicroscope with various magnifications.The visual inspection shows the tip in detail.There is no fractured surface for an assessment.The situation in which the defect occurred can no longer be reconstructed, nor can the strain put on the device be determined.Therefore, the customer¿s complaint is confirmed, but the root cause cannot be identified by this investigation.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.No root cause for the customers reported event could be determined, since the situation that lead to the instrument failure cannot be reconstructed.As the root cause and its origin are inconclusive, further investigative or manufacturing actions are not warranted at this time.Receipt of additional relevant information or supporting materials will prompt a re-evaluation of the complaint investigation.Complaint data for all manufacturer 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).
|