|
(b)(4).Per photographic evaluation: upon visual inspection, the tip of the sample appears to be separated.There appears to be evidence the cotton tip being properly attached to the shaft; however, no definitive conclusion could be reached as to the cause of the reported incident as the device was not returned for analysis.The photo does not provide enough evidence to determine root cause.Hands on analysis should provide the evidence necessary to confirm the root cause.Device analysis: the analysis results found that the shaft of a bcd10 devices was returned for analysis.Upon evaluation, the dissector tip was found separated from the shaft, evidence of adhesive was found in the tip of the shaft as the cotton appears to have been pulled off.No conclusion could be reached as to what may have caused the reported incident.The complaint was confirmed.The lot history record was reviewed and no defects, ncr¿s or protocols related to the complaint, were found during the packaging process.
|