• Decrease font size
  • Return font size to normal
  • Increase font size
U.S. Department of Health and Human Services

MAUDE Adverse Event Report: ERBE ELEKTROMEDIZIN GMBH ERBE VIO 3; ELECTROSURGICAL UNIT

  • Print
  • Share
  • E-mail
-
Super Search Devices@FDA
510(k) | DeNovo | Registration & Listing | Adverse Events | Recalls | PMA | HDE | Classification | Standards
CFR Title 21 | Radiation-Emitting Products | X-Ray Assembler | Medsun Reports | CLIA | TPLC
 

ERBE ELEKTROMEDIZIN GMBH ERBE VIO 3; ELECTROSURGICAL UNIT Back to Search Results
Model Number VIO 3
Device Problem Appropriate Term/Code Not Available (3191)
Patient Problem Partial thickness (Second Degree) Burn (2694)
Event Date 01/03/2024
Event Type  Injury  
Event Description
It was reported that a patient incident occurred with the electrosurgical unit (esu/generator) during a gastric endoscopic submucosal dissection (esd).The esu was used with an erbe hybridknife "i" type and an olympus coag grasper.The settings were endocut i, 3-3-2 and dry cut effect 4 as well as forced coag, effect 3 and soft coag.After the procedure, burn/necrosis marks were discovered on the patient's right index finger.A photograph showed that there were two (2) burn marks close to each other.One of the marks was black as well as red in color and approximately 2 cm x 0.5 cm.The other was smaller (about 1 cm x 0.5 cm) with small speckled black spots.Per the account, the finger touched the "fluro bed metal skirt" during the procedure.No information was provided regards to any treatment given to address the burn/necrosis marks.
 
Manufacturer Narrative
The esu was thoroughly inspected/tested.The unit was found to be functioning as intended.The evaluation included an electrical safety check, a functional check of each of the equipment's features and a power output check.The generator was/is within specifications and all features were/are working properly.In addition, no anomalies were found in the device history record (dhr) of the involved device [note: two (2) monopolar cables, part number 20192-135, lot numbers 1219 and 1221 were also returned as part of the evaluation.They both were functioning as intended.].In conclusion, no equipment problem was found that would have caused or contributed to the incident.Based upon the reported information, the patient's finger encountered a conductive metallic object (i.E., the fluro bed metal skirt) at the site of the injury.Due to high current density in a small area at the site, the metal became hot which resulted in the thermal damage (note: there is a warning in the user manual addressing this type of situation.).The account is being made aware of the findings.No trends have been identified and erbe usa, inc.Is now closing the file on this event.
 
Search Alerts/Recalls

  New Search  |  Submit an Adverse Event Report

Brand Name
ERBE VIO 3
Type of Device
ELECTROSURGICAL UNIT
Manufacturer (Section D)
ERBE ELEKTROMEDIZIN GMBH
waldhornlestrasse 17
tubingen, germany 72072
GM  72072
Manufacturer (Section G)
ERBE ELEKTROMEDIZIN GMBH
waldhornlestrasse 17
tubingen, germany 72072
GM   72072
Manufacturer Contact
john tartal
2225 northwest parkway
marietta, GA 30067-8764
7709554400
MDR Report Key18545597
MDR Text Key333273153
Report Number9610614-2024-00006
Device Sequence Number1
Product Code GEI
Combination Product (y/n)N
Reporter Country CodeUS
PMA/PMN Number
K190823
Number of Events Reported1
Summary Report (Y/N)N
Report Source Manufacturer
Source Type Health Professional,User Facility,Company Representative
Reporter Occupation Other Health Care Professional
Type of Report Initial
Report Date 01/03/2024
1 Device was Involved in the Event
1 Patient was Involved in the Event
Is this an Adverse Event Report? Yes
Is this a Product Problem Report? No
Device Operator Health Professional
Device Model NumberVIO 3
Device Catalogue Number10160-000
Was Device Available for Evaluation? Device Returned to Manufacturer
Date Returned to Manufacturer01/12/2024
Is the Reporter a Health Professional? Yes
Initial Date Manufacturer Received 01/03/2024
Initial Date FDA Received01/19/2024
Was Device Evaluated by Manufacturer? Yes
Date Device Manufactured06/10/2022
Is the Device Single Use? No
Is This a Reprocessed and Reused Single-Use Device? No
Type of Device Usage Reuse
Patient Sequence Number1
Patient Outcome(s) Other;
Patient Age50 YR
Patient SexMale
-
-