We use cookies to provide you with a better experience. By continuing to browse the site you are agreeing to our use of cookies in accordance with our Cookie Policy.
  • SKIP TO CONTENT
  • SKIP NAVIGATION
  • Drug Products
    • Books
    • FDAnews Books Library
    • Events
    • Form 483s Database
    • Subscription Newsletters
    • Free Newsletters
    • Webinar Training Pass
    • eCFR and Guidances
  • Device Products
    • Books
    • FDAnews Books Library
    • Events
    • Form 483s Database
    • Subscription Newsletters
    • Free Newsletters
    • Webinar Training Pass
    • eCFR and Guidances
  • Clinical Products
  • Advertising
  • White Papers
  • Contact Us
  • About Us
  • COVID-19
  • Sign In
  • Create Account
  • Sign Out
  • My Account
Home » Medtronic Handed Form 483 on CAPAs, Inspections

Medtronic Handed Form 483 on CAPAs, Inspections

August 27, 2014

Medtronic Navigation was handed a six-observation Form 483 for issues related to CAPA, supplier investigations and quality inspections.

For example, the company had not validated accuracy acceptance testing for its S7 Surgeon Touch Monitor, which helps locate anatomical structures in open or percutaneous procedures. Medtronic classified the testing as a business need, rather than a user need, according to the form. However, the FDA’s review of complaint files for 2013 showed six that appeared to report accuracy issues with the monitor.

FDA investigators also reviewed five nonconformance reports, finding three that lacked documentation of a supplier investigation. While the company’s procedure states reworked material must be reinspected, an NCR requiring rework lacked documentation of a reinspection.

Meanwhile, the company’s standard operating procedure for unused, returned product did not state when a quality inspection of the product is necessary or address the disposition of returned goods. The investigators reviewed returned goods authorizations, finding six where products were returned to inventory with no documentation of inspection, testing or other verification.

They also reviewed documentation on the initial validation of the GoldenEye Calibration Robot, finding nothing on challenge tests for worst-case conditions or performance under a variety of process parameters.

Medtronic’s CAPA procedure also drew investigators’ attention. According to the procedure, once a CAPA has moved into the action execution phase, it can no longer receive a “no further action required” designation. However, two CAPA files with documentation of actions were classified as “closed-no action” and no effectiveness checks were performed, the form says.

Moreover, the company’s procedure states that CAPA timeliness is ensured by monitoring the progression of the CAPA phases, but eight files had investigation initiation dates 30 days or more after the creation log date of the CAPA file, the Form 483 adds.

Medtronic did not provide a comment on the Form 483.

Wondering what would improve your device company’s CAPA performance? We have answers from an exclusive, FDAnews survey of devicemakers, the Medical Device Manufacturer CAPA Benchmarking Survey.

Upcoming Events

  • 10Mar

    FDA Drug GMP Facility Inspections During the Pandemic

  • 16Mar

    Pharmaceutical Naming Regulation: Understanding the Latest Developments

  • 18Mar

    Pharmaceutical Postmarket Surveillance: Latest Developments in the Era of COVID-19

  • 23Mar

    Data Integrity for GCP Professionals: Core Requirements, Expectations and Challenges

  • 30Mar

    Data Integrity for GMP/Postmarket Professionals: Core Requirements, Expectations and Challenges

  • 06Apr

    Medical Device Cybersecurity: Understand the Latest Developments

Featured Products

  • Biological Risk Evaluation and Management for Medical Devices

  • GMP Inspection Preparation Checklist: A Tool for Internal Auditing

Featured Stories

  • WhiteHouse.gif

    President Biden Issues Executive Order on U.S. Supply Chain

  • roche.gif

    Priority Healthcare Settles Diabetes Test Lawsuit with Roche for $43 Million

  • Effective text

    Pfizer/BioNTech Vaccine Equally Effective for All Age Groups, Israeli Study Says

  • Siemens Healthineers logo

    Siemens Healthineers’ COVID-19 Antigen Lab Test Receives CE Mark

The Revised ICH E8: A Guide to New Clinical Trial Requirements

Learn More
  • Drug Products
    • Quality
    • Regulatory Affairs
    • GMPs
    • Inspections and Audits
    • Postmarket Safety
    • Submissions and Approvals
    • Research and Development
    • Commercial Operations
  • Device Products
    • Quality
    • Regulatory Affairs
    • QSR
    • Inspections and Audits
    • Postmarket Safety
    • Submissions and Approvals
    • Research and Development
    • Commercial Operations
  • Clinical Products
    • Trial Design
    • Data Integrity
    • GCP
    • Inspections and Audits
    • Transparency
  • Privacy Policy
  • Do Not Sell My Personal Information
Footer Logo

300 N. Washington St., Suite 200, Falls Church, VA 22046, USA

Phone 703.538.7600 – Fax 703.538.7676 – Toll free 888.838.5578

Copyright © 2021. All Rights Reserved. Design, CMS, Hosting & Web Development :: ePublishing