|
Investigation - evaluation : a review of the complaint history, drawings, dimensional verification, device history record, instructions for use (ifu), manufacturing instructions, quality control and visual inspection of the returned device was conducted during the investigation.Visual inspection of the returned device was performed.The device failure analysis determined that all relevant dimensions are within specification a document based investigation evaluation was also performed.There is no evidence to suggest the product was not made to specifications.Review of device history record shows no nonconforming events which could contribute to this failure mode.It should be noted there were no other reported complaints for this lot number.The device is shipped with an instruction for use (ifu) that describes the intended use; specific items are addressed such as: "while holding the external portion of the catheter with one hand, just proximal to the white suture wing, grasp the suture wing and slide it forward until the black indicator mark on the external portion of the catheter is visible.This will indicate proper expansion of the friction-lock malecot." based on the information provided, examination of the returned device and the results of our investigation it is feasible that the doctor was stabilizing the catheter by holding the red hub instead of positioning his hand just proximal of the white suture wing as required by the ifu.The pressure placed at the hub would likely cause the separation that was seen in consecutive device usage and failure.The root cause is most likely user technique.We will continue to monitor for similar complaints.
|