There was no known reported patient involvement associated with the complained event.
Device is an instrument and is not implanted/explanted.
The subject device has been received and the product evaluation is in progress.
No conclusion can be drawn.
A review of the device history records has been requested and is currently pending completion.
Device was used for treatment, not diagnosis.
If information is obtained that was not available for the initial medwatch, a follow-up medwatch will be filed as appropriate.
|
A device history record (dhr) review was conducted for part: 03.
037.
025, lot: 9604299: manufacturing site: (b)(4), release to warehouse date: 23.
Sep.
2015: the device history record shows this lot of 48 pieces was processed through the normal manufacturing and inspection operations with no rework or nonconformities noted.
This lot met all dimensional, visual and functional criteria at the time of release with no issues documented during the manufacturing process.
Review of the device history record showed that there were no issues during the manufacture of this product which would contribute to this complaint condition.
A product investigation was conducted.
Visual inspection: visual inspection performed on the returned screw inserter observed that the cannulation for the helical blade insertion proximal to blue handle portion was dented and slightly deformed inwards.
No new issues were identified on other portions of the device.
Functional inspection: functional inspection performed showed coupling screw being stuck at its proximal shaft portion when inserted into the screw inserter which could possibly be due to the inserter's deformed mating surfaces.
The complaint condition was able to be replicated at the customer quality and the complaint condition was confirmed.
Drawing review: based on the date of manufacture the relevant drawings, reflecting the current and manufactured revision, were reviewed.
Dimensional analysis and document/specification review: dimensional inspection performed at the dented edge diameter and falls out of the specification per relevant drawing.
The out of specification is due to post manufacture damage.
Furthermore, the internal cannulation diameter past the raised and dented edge diameter was measured and the measurements were obtained within the specification per relevant drawings which confirms that the device has out of specification dimensions only at the dented edge which is the result of post manufacture damage.
Conclusion: a definitive root cause for the complaint condition could not be determined from the provided information.
However, it is likely that any unintended excessive forces such as unintended impaction during usage could have contributed to this complaint condition.
The overall complaint condition is confirmed; however, no product design issues or manufacturing discrepancies were identified during this investigation based on the investigation findings, it has been determined that no corrective and/or preventative action is proposed.
Device was used for treatment, not diagnosis.
If information is obtained that was not available for the initial medwatch, a follow-up medwatch will be filed as appropriate.
|