|
It was reported, prior to patient contact, the hub of the flexor raabe guiding sheath separated.Upon inserting the dilator into the sheath, the sheath detached from the hub.Reportedly, the procedure was completed after changing to a new device.The device did not make contact with the patient.
|
|
Summary of event: it was reported, prior to patient contact, the hub of the flexor raabe guiding sheath separated.Upon inserting the dilator into the sheath, the sheath detached from the hub.Reportedly, the procedure was completed after changing to a new device.The device did not make contact with the patient.Investigation evaluation: a review of the complaint history, device history record, instructions for use (ifu), manufacturing instructions, dimensional verification, and quality control was conducted during the investigation, as well as a visual inspection of the complaint device.The complaint device was returned for investigation.The flare was pulled through the hub and the flare was uneven.There was no additional damage noted to the sheath.No biomatter was noted.The inner diameter of the connector cap was measured to be within specification.The flare passed through the flare gauge.A document-based investigation evaluation was performed.There have been no other reported complaints for this lot number.One possibly-related non-conformance was found; however, affected units were scrapped and not replaced.Given that there are no other complaints on the lot and non-conforming product has been identified and dispositioned accordingly during manufacture, there is no evidence to suggest that non-conforming product from this lot or similar lots exists in house or in the field.The product ifu states: ¿upon removal from package, inspect the product to ensure no damage has occurred.¿ in response to this complaint, cook also reviewed the device master record for this device to check that there are adequate controls in place to prevent the failure of proximal fitting separation.The quality control, manufacturing, and work instructions contain adequate measures to address the failure mode prior to distribution.Review of this documentation did not reveal gaps in the manufacturing or quality control processes.Based on the information provided and the results of the investigation, cook has concluded that while a definitive cause for this failure could not be determined, there is objective evidence to suggest that the device was manufactured to specification.Possible causes for this failure include storage, shipping damage or excessive handling damage during preparation.Risk was assessed for this complaint event.No risk escalation activities are recommended at this time.The appropriate personnel have been notified and cook will continue to monitor for similar events.This report is required by the fda under 21 cfr part 803 and is based on unconfirmed information submitted by others.Neither the submission of this report nor any statement contained herein is intended to be an admission that any cook device is defective or malfunctioned, that a death or serious injury occurred, nor that any cook device caused, contributed to, or is likely to cause or contribute to a death or serious injury if a malfunction occurred.
|