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

MAUDE Adverse Event Report: TELEFLEX MEDICAL SATINSKY CLAMP SMALL AG; CLAMP, VASCULAR

  • 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
 

TELEFLEX MEDICAL SATINSKY CLAMP SMALL AG; CLAMP, VASCULAR Back to Search Results
Catalog Number 354004
Device Problem Adverse Event Without Identified Device or Use Problem (2993)
Patient Problem No Known Impact Or Consequence To Patient (2692)
Event Date 10/25/2016
Event Type  Death  
Manufacturer Narrative
(b)(4).The device has not been returned for investigation at this time.The manufacturer will continue to monitor and trend related events.
 
Event Description
Patient was undergoing living donor right liver procurement.The patient underwent hand-assisted laparoscopic mobilization of the right liver, followed by hilar dissection and parenchymal division.The right liver was removed after ligation and division of the right hepatic artery and the right portal vein, occlusion of the right hepatic vein with a vascular clamp, followed by division of the right hepatic vein.The right liver allograft was passed off the operative field to be flushed and prepared for implantation.Almost immediately afterward, the staff surgeon noticed that the right hepatic vein stump had slipped out of the clamp.The lumen of the cava was visible indicating that the donor had sustained a large air embolism.
 
Manufacturer Narrative
(b)(4).Dhr was reviewed for notifications pertaining to incoming inspection, stock checks, and product returns.No concerns were noted with reference to statinsky clamps - however the age of the device exceeds our 10 year records retention policy.(1) sample of 354004 lot ff8 was received for evaluation.Ff8 corresponds to june of 1998.This sample is 18 years old but appears to be in good shape.Visual review of the sample prior to opening the peel pouch - noted that a silicone tip protector has been placed over the ratchets.Further review after opening noted that the silicone protector has been damaged and dented in multiple locations across its length.Though it causes no damage to the device- it should be noted that this is not the correct use for a tip protector.The silicone tip protector was removed from the ratchets and the device was closed to the last ratchet.The jaws are fully closed with the last ratchet engaged.The handles were sharply impacted on a flat surface to test the retention of the other remarks: ratchet which held firmly.A rolled rubber glove was then placed in the jaws to test the security of the grip.The ratchets were fully engaged and the test material was pulled with excessive force.The jaws retained the material with no movement.The handles were sharply impacted on a flat surface to test retention under load and did not release.The jaws were then disengaged, and the test material was examined for trauma.No perforations or punctures were evident in the thin rubber glove @ 10x magnification when stretched to twice its length.The jaws and ratchets function as expected with no concerns noted.Additional testing was performed with the silicone tip protector placed over the ratchets.In the "as received" configuration the silicone protector prevents proper engagement of the ratchet.The ratchet will stop at the dented regions of the silicone and immediately slip back to the torn region when under load.Based on the complaint description and the damaged noted to the protector- it is highly likely that this foreign element was present during the procedure.Tip protection is not mentioned in any revision of the ifu.Ring handles should be open and disengaged during cleaning.This device was not sterilized according to ifu parameters prior to return.I was unable to replicate the failure mode without the presence of the silicone tip protector.Results - no result code available that could accurately describe that the complaint was confirmed, but the root cause is unknown.
 
Event Description
Patient was undergoing living donor right liver procurement.The patient underwent hand-assisted laparoscopic mobilization of the right liver, followed by hilar dissection and parenchymal division.The right liver was removed after ligation and division of the right hepatic artery and the right portal vein, occlusion of the right hepatic vein with a vascular clamp, followed by division of the right hepatic vein.The right liver allograft was passed off the operative field to be flushed and prepared for implantation.Almost immediately afterward, the staff surgeon noticed that the right hepatic vein stump had slipped out of the clamp.The lumen of the cava was visible indicating that the donor had sustained a large air embolism.
 
Search Alerts/Recalls

  New Search  |  Submit an Adverse Event Report

Brand Name
SATINSKY CLAMP SMALL AG
Type of Device
CLAMP, VASCULAR
Manufacturer (Section D)
TELEFLEX MEDICAL
research triangle park NC
Manufacturer (Section G)
TELEFLEX MEDICAL
3015 carrington mill blvd
morrisville NC 27560
Manufacturer Contact
jasmine brown
3015 carrington mill blvd
morrisville, NC 27560
9193614124
MDR Report Key6147312
MDR Text Key61512127
Report Number3011137372-2016-00353
Device Sequence Number1
Product Code DXC
Combination Product (y/n)N
Reporter Country CodeUS
Number of Events Reported1
Summary Report (Y/N)N
Report Source Manufacturer
Source Type company representative,health
Reporter Occupation Physician
Type of Report Initial,Followup
Report Date 12/05/2016
1 Device was Involved in the Event
1 Patient was Involved in the Event
Is this an Adverse Event Report? No
Is this a Product Problem Report? No
Device Operator Health Professional
Device Catalogue Number354004
Was Device Available for Evaluation? Device Returned to Manufacturer
Date Returned to Manufacturer12/21/2016
Is the Reporter a Health Professional? Yes
Initial Date Manufacturer Received 12/05/2016
Initial Date FDA Received12/06/2016
Supplement Dates Manufacturer ReceivedNot provided
Supplement Dates FDA Received01/18/2017
Was Device Evaluated by Manufacturer? Device Not Returned to Manufacturer
Is the Device Single Use? Yes
Is This a Reprocessed and Reused Single-Use Device? No
Type of Device Usage N
Patient Sequence Number1
Patient Outcome(s) Death;
-
-