|
Report source - other: (b)(6).Investigation summary: a review of the complaint history, instructions for use (ifu), device history record, specifications and a visual inspection of the returned device were conducted during the investigation.One opened complaint device was returned for investigation.Photos are provided.Dilator and sheath returned assembled together; the hub was secured inside a plastic hub protective snap pack.Under magnification, the outer surface of the sheath material had been scraped 1.5cm from the distal tip.The coating on the sheath had been scraped off the surface.There were no pieces of sheath coating returned.No obvious manufacturing anomalies were identified or confirmed on the returned sample.Based on the evidence presented by the sample and the physical analysis, this device has been damaged by an instrument of unknown origin.Additionally, a document based investigation evaluation was performed.There was no evidence to suggest the product was not made to specifications.A review of the device history record found (b)(4) non-conformance associated with the complaint device lot number which were identified and reworked prior to further processing.It should be noted there were no other reported complaints for this lot number.Based on the information provided, the examination of the returned product, and the results of our investigation, a definitive root cause could not be determined, however; based on the provided information, and the device evaluation, the probable root cause is deemed to be; ¿product use or handling related".However, appropriate measures have been initiated to address this failure mode.The quality engineering risk assessment for this failure mode was reviewed and it was determined that risk mitigation activities are being investigated.The appropriate personnel will be notified and we will continue to monitor for similar complaints.
|