|
The device, used in treatment, was not returned for evaluation.A relationship, if any, between the subject device and the reported event could not be determined since the product was not returned for evaluation.Visual inspection and functional testing could not be performed because the device in question was not returned for evaluation.Thus, the complaint could not be verified, nor could a root cause be determined with confidence.If the product associated with this event is returned at a future date, this evaluation will be reopened for investigation.Factors not associated with the manufacture or design of the device which could result in damage to the tip could be the device coming into abrupt contact with a hard (metallic) object, improper insertion or removal from an apparatus, use at a higher than recommended set point or excessive force applied to the tip can also lead to unintended detachment.There were no indications during manufacturing record review that would suggest that the device did not meet product specifications upon release into distribution.
|
|
The device, intended for use in treatment, was returned as an mdr for evaluation.There was a relationship found between the device and the reported incident.Visual inspection under magnification shows extensive electrode screen wear with contamination/discoloration on screen/cap and with scratch/scuff marks on spacer and cap.There are no manufacturing abnormalities visually observed with the returned device.There are no manufacturing abnormalities visually observed with the returned wand.During functional evaluation the device was plugged into a known good controller system and activated in saline solution.The device produced plasma on the remaining stubs of the screen/electrodes.The customer complaint was verified.A possible root cause for the reported event could be (1) reuse of the device (2) overloading and not adhering to the desired set-point (3) vacuum range for saline not in range.Factors unrelated to the design and manufacture of the device which could probably have contributed to the complaint event are outlined in the precautionary states in the instruction for use provided with the device associated with set-up and use of the device.There were no indications that would suggest that the device did not meet product specification upon release into distribution.
|