It was noted that the uterus had ruptured [uterine rupture] they placed the jada but it didn¿t work [device ineffective].Case narrative: this initial spontaneous report originating from the united states, was received from a physician via clinical educator referring to a female patient of unknown age.The patient's medical history included vaginal birth after cesarean (vbac).The patient's other medical history and concomitant medications were not reported.This report concerns 1 patient and 1 device.On an unknown date, the patient was placed with vacuum-induced hemorrhage control system (jada system) via unknown route (lot# and expiry date not reported) for haemorrhage after a vbac (postpartum haemorrhage) but it did not work (device ineffective) and when they took the patient back to the operating room (or) it was noted that the uterus had ruptured (uterine rupture).Per the provider, they were not sure if vacuum-induced hemorrhage control system (jada system) caused the rupture.The outcome of uterine rupture was unknown.Causality assessment was not provided.The availability of the vacuum-induced hemorrhage control system (jada system) for evaluation was unknown.Upon internal review, the event of device ineffective and uterine rupture were considered to be medically significant.Medical device reporting criteria: serious injury.Fda code: (health effects - health impact per annex f): 4624 (one or more surgical procedures was required, or an existing procedure changed.) when the lot number is unknown, a technical investigation of the specific manufacturing process which includes review of records associated with a known lot number cannot be performed.Therefore, priority quality investigation will not be completed.
|