|
It was reported, during a pcnl (percutaneous nephrolithotomy) antegrade ureteroscopy using a perc ngage nitinol tipless stone extractor, the basket broke after only one pass in the kidney.Another device was opened and used to successfully complete the procedure.According to the initial reported, no adverse effects were reported due to the alleged malfunction.
|
|
It was reported, the basket broke after only one pass in the kidney.Another device was opened and used to successfully complete the procedure.Investigation evaluation: reviews of complaint history, device history record, manufacturing instructions, quality control data and the instructions for use(ifu) were conducted during the investigation.The complaint device was not returned; therefore, no physical examinations could be performed.However, a document based investigation evaluation was performed.The evidence indicated the device was made to specification.A review of the device history record found no non-conformances related to the reported failure mode.A review of complaint history records shows no other complaints associated with the complaint device lot.Because there were no related non-conformances, adequate inspection activities have been established, there is objective evidence that the dhr was fully executed, and no other lot related complaints that have been received from the field, it was concluded that there is no evidence that nonconforming product exists in house or in field.The instructions for use (ifu), provides the following information to the user related to the reported failure mode: precautions: this device is conductive.Avoid contact with any electrified instrument.Excessive force could damage device.The device was not returned.The provided information stated the device "broke".Based on previous complaints, it is assumed that the basket of the device would not open and close properly, as that was the most common failure mode for the device.Without the device available for investigation, a cause for the issue could not be determined.The risk documentation procedures were reviewed, and it was determined that no actions are required.We will continue our monitoring of similar complaints.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.
|