|
The observation stated in the reported event could be confirmed, based on analysis of the infection checklist, that was returned by the customer.For infection complaints expanded investigations are performed at the manufacturing site stryker malvern to assure that neither the complained device nor all related manufacturing process steps have caused or contributed to the reported event.Furthermore, it is evaluated if the risk assumptions in the related fmea are in correspondence with the reported event.All results were documented within the ¿infection complaints - checklist investigator¿ (b)(4).No discrepancies were found.To gain more information about the complained event the ¿infection complaints _ checklist customer¿ (b)(4) was forwarded to the sales rep.It was stated that there were no anomalies regarding the undamaged status of the sterile packaging and / or the sterility of the product.According to the surgeon the reported infection is patient related and does not originate from the medpor implant.Based on that assessment the surgeon performed also the revision surgery using a medpor product.Furthermore, the patient had a history of hepatitis c infections.Even if the exact type of infection detected was not further specified, the customer mentioned that it was ¿a very common form of bacteria¿.Finally, the sales rep added that he believes the patient even had an infection prior to the surgery, however, this could not be confirmed for 100%.Summarizing all obtained information, the complaint root cause can be linked to a patient related issue.Based on the investigation, the dhr review of the related manufacturing and quality documents, the results from the expanded investigation at the manufacturer site and based on the assessment of the customer himself, there is no indication for a not correctly working product or any systematic design, material or manufacturing related issue.Therefore, no corrective and/or preventive actions are deemed necessary at that time.The complaint is added to the complaint trend.
|