|
The customer's reported complaint of a fractured fiber was be confirmed based on a photograph provided, however, the sample was not returned for evaluation.As the reported defective device was not returned, angiodynamics is unable to perform a device evaluation.As a device evaluation could not be performed, a root cause for the event cannot be determined.Angiodynamics' supplier of this device was notified of the event via (b)(4).Per the vendor's scar response, at the vendor facility, manufacturing and inspections procedures include a 100% inspection of the entire fiber, including the quality of each strip.Each unit is also repeatedly bent and coiled during the processing and there is a final visual inspection performed with a hene laser to check the entire fiber length for defects prior to packaging and shipment.During the hene laser test the fiber tip is examined closely for damage.During the packaging step, the fibers are inspected for damage.Without receiving product to evaluate, the root cause cannot be determined, although it is unlikely that the fiber was fractured prior to packaging.The most likely root cause to this event is due to handling after the device left the angiodynamics facility.A review of the angiodynamics' device history records was performed for the reported packaging and component lots for any deviations related to the reported defect of the complaint.The review confirms that the lots met all material, assembly, and performance specifications.The directions for use, which is supplied to the end user with this catalog number, contains the following statement "prior to and during use, avoid damaging the fiber by striking, stressing or excessive bending.Do not coil the fiber tighter than a radius of 60mm".A review of the angiodynamics complaint system noted no trends for this complaint type and product family.This type of complaint will continue to be monitored for trends.Complaint # (b)(4).
|