• 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 300 D; 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 300 D; ELECTROSURGICAL UNIT Back to Search Results
Model Number VIO 300 D
Device Problem Appropriate Term/Code Not Available (3191)
Patient Problem Burn(s) (1757)
Event Date 03/21/2024
Event Type  Injury  
Event Description
It was reported that a patient incident occurred with the electrosurgical unit (esu/generator) during a transurethral resection (tur) of the bladder to remove a tumor.The esu was used with a dahlhausen neutral electrode (also referred to as a return electrode, patient pad, etc.) [part number 19.000.02.605, lot number information not provided].The neutral electrode was placed on the patient's right thigh.No information was provided regarding any of the other accessories used in the operation.Also, the esu settings used were not provided.However, it was reported that due to not achieving the desired tissue effect, the power was manually increased.Additionally, according to the user, there were no warnings from the generator regarding the quality of the application of the neutral electrode.When removing the return electrode, a skin lesion was found underneath it.A photograph of the necrosis showed a semi-circular reddening approximately 1 cm wide.The photograph also revealed that the adhesive site of the neutral electrode was still very hairy and therefore the placement site had not been prepared.The burn was treated with ointment.
 
Manufacturer Narrative
The esu was thoroughly inspected/tested (note: since the involved neutral electrode was from another manufacturer, it was not available for an evaluation by erbe.Therefore, an assessment of the accessory's safety and functionality is unknown to us.).The generator 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 unit was/is within specifications and all features were/are working properly.Finally, no anomalies were found in the device history record (dhr) of the involved device.In conclusion, no erbe equipment problem was found that would have caused or contributed to the incident.As part of the generator's assessment, the chronological data at the time of the operation was reviewed.The data revealed the following: 1.There were 25 activations during the procedure.2.The settings were auto cut, effect 4 at 180 watts and forced coag, effect 2 at 100 watts.3.Several activations were longer than 10 seconds.One of these activations was terminated by the device after 40 seconds.4.There were approximately 19 messages regarding the current density, which indicated that the neutral electrode current was above the permitted current density.The message is non-activation interrupting.Based upon the information provided, the lesion was most likely a thermal burn.However, other possible causes of the skin lesion couldn't be ruled out.In this case, the inadequately prepared application site of the neutral electrode, the high output settings, the long activations, etc.Combined with the warning messages from the unit regarding activation duration and current density are indicative of issues which would lead to a pad burn.That is, the current/heat was not sufficiently dispersed by the neutral electrode which resulted in the necrosis.However, no conclusive determination could be made as to the cause of the incident.Nevertheless, warnings in the esu's user manual address the risk of pad burns and provide mitigation measures to minimize the possibility of burns.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 300 D
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 Key19031165
MDR Text Key339221513
Report Number9610614-2024-00024
Device Sequence Number1
Product Code GEI
Combination Product (y/n)N
Reporter Country CodeGM
PMA/PMN Number
K083452
Number of Events Reported1
Summary Report (Y/N)N
Report Source Manufacturer
Source Type Foreign,Health Professional,User Facility,Company Representative
Reporter Occupation Other
Type of Report Initial
Report Date 04/03/2024
1 Device was Involved in the Event
1 Patient was Involved in the Event
Date FDA Received04/03/2024
Is this an Adverse Event Report? Yes
Is this a Product Problem Report? No
Device Operator Health Professional
Device Model NumberVIO 300 D
Device Catalogue Number10140-100
Was Device Available for Evaluation? Device Returned to Manufacturer
Date Returned to Manufacturer03/25/2024
Date Manufacturer Received03/22/2024
Was Device Evaluated by Manufacturer? Yes
Date Device Manufactured05/29/2009
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 Age63 YR
Patient SexMale
-
-