Clinical investigation: a clinical investigation was performed to identify a causal relationship between the peritoneal dialysis (pd) treatment and the adverse event.Based on the provided information there is no documentation to show a causal relationship between the patient¿s myocardial infarction and subsequent hospitalization and the liberty cycler.Additionally, there is no report of a device malfunction against the liberty cycler for this event.It cannot be determined if there is a temporal relationship between pd therapy on the cycler and the myocardial infarction as there is no documentation to show if the patient was in active treatment at the time of the event.It is probable that the patient¿s extensive history of cardiac comorbidities contributed to the event.Plant investigation: the reported complaint was not confirmed as the complaint device was not available for manufacturer evaluation.As such, a definitive conclusion regarding the complaint incident cannot be reached without a physical examination of the complaint device.A records review was performed on the reported lot.An investigation of the device history records (dhr) was conducted by the manufacturer.There were no nonconformances or abnormalities identified during the manufacturing process which could be associated with the reported event.In addition, the dhr review confirmed the results of the in-progress and final quality control (qc) testing met all requirements.The lot met all specifications for release.A review of the dhr did not reveal a probable cause for the customer complaint.
|