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

MAUDE Adverse Event Report: GENZYME BIOSURGERY (RIDGEFIELD) SYNVISC; MOZ

  • 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
 

GENZYME BIOSURGERY (RIDGEFIELD) SYNVISC; MOZ Back to Search Results
Lot Number UNKNOWN
Device Problem Adverse Event Without Identified Device or Use Problem (2993)
Patient Problems Dyspnea (1816); Rash (2033); No Code Available (3191)
Event Date 09/13/2018
Event Type  Injury  
Event Description
Motor skills weren't good/ wasn't even able to squeeze a finger [motor dysfunction], anaphylactic shock [anaphylactic shock], ([blood pressure decreased], [shortness of breath], [vital functions abnormal]), rash [rash].Case narrative: initial information received from united states on 14-sep-2018 regarding an unsolicited valid serious case received from a doctor.This case involves (b)(6) years old female patient who experienced motor skills weren't good/ wasn't even able to squeeze a finger, anaphylactic shock and rash (latency: unknown), while she was treated with the use of medical device hylan g-f 20, sodium hyaluronate (synvisc).The patient's medical treatment(s), vaccination(s) and family history were not provided.It was reported that there was nothing in the patient's history in regards to an avian allergy.Concomitant medications included diphenhydramine hydrochloride (benadryl).On an unknown date, the patient started using hylan g-f 20, sodium hyaluronate injection, intra-articular route at an unknown dose (lot - unknown) for unknown indication.On an unknown date, after first injection patient had rash (latency: unknown) which went away with diphenhydramine hydrochloride and patient felt great.It was reported that doctor was thinking about switching her to another product because he was worried about sensitivity but there was nothing in the patient's history in regard to an avian allergy and she had actually raised chickens so there wasn't a lot of concern.It was reported that patient's motor skills were good.They kept her for observation.He states that she was insistent upon getting hylan g-f 20, sodium hyaluronate again because her results were very good after the first injection.On (b)(6) 2018, patient received second injection of hylan g-f 20, sodium hyaluronate.On the same day, 5-10 minutes after the injection, around 12 pm patient went into anaphylactic shock (latency: unknown), had shortness of breath, vitals were dropping, and blood pressure was 90/60.Patient was administered an epinephrine shot and they called 911.Ten-fifteen min, later, the paramedics arrived and gave her another epinephrine shot and they also gave her a salbutamol (albuterol) inhaler and patient's motor skills weren't good and she wasn't even able to squeeze a finger in the office (latency: unknown).Patient's motor skills improved on the way to the ambulance.They were not sure if it was prior or post that the icm contrast (iodinated contrast media) was administered to the patient which was 0.5 cc.Patient was given 10-20 mg of triamcinolone acetonide (kenalog) post hylan g-f 20, sodium hyaluronate.Final diagnosis was anaphylactic shock, motor skills weren't good/ wasn't even able to squeeze a finger and rash.Action taken: unknown.Corrective treatment: triamcinolone acetonide for motor skills weren't good/ wasn't even able to squeeze a finger; triamcinolone acetonide, salbutamol inhaler, epinephrine shot for anaphylactic shock; diphenhydramine hydrochloride for rash.Outcome: recovered / resolved for rash, recovering for motor skills weren't good/ wasn't even able to squeeze a finger; unknown for rest of the events.Seriousness criteria: intervention required for anaphylactic shock, motor skills weren't good/ wasn't even able to squeeze a finger and medically significant for anaphylactic shock.A product technical complaint was initiated on 20-sep-2018 for synvisc.Batch number: unknown global ptc (b)(4).The product lot number was not provided; therefore, a batch record review is not possible.Based on lack of information provided, no capa is required.It was the requirement to review all finished batch records for specification conformation prior to release.Any out of specification result is identified and mitigated through the ncr process.Sanofi global pharmacovigilance and epidemiology continuously monitors adverse event reports with or without lot numbers and assesses possible associations with their corresponding product lot, as part of routine surveillance effort to detect safety signals.This review did not indicate any safety issue.Sanofi would continue to monitor adverse events to determine if a capa was required.Additional information received on 20-sep-2018.Investigation summary received and ptc results added.Clinical course updated.Text amended accordingly.
 
Search Alerts/Recalls

  New Search  |  Submit an Adverse Event Report

Brand Name
SYNVISC
Type of Device
MOZ
Manufacturer (Section D)
GENZYME BIOSURGERY (RIDGEFIELD)
1125 pleasantview terrace
ridgefield NJ 07657
Manufacturer (Section G)
GENZYME BIOSURGERY (RIDGEFIELD)
1125 pleasantview terrace
ridgefield NJ 07657
Manufacturer Contact
darlene kadel
55 corporate drive, ms 55b-220
a
bridgewater, NJ 08807
MDR Report Key7919874
MDR Text Key122153376
Report Number2246315-2018-00604
Device Sequence Number1
Product Code MOZ
Combination Product (y/n)N
Reporter Country CodeUS
Number of Events Reported1
Summary Report (Y/N)N
Report Source Manufacturer
Source Type health professional
Reporter Occupation Physician
Type of Report Initial
Report Date 09/28/2018
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 Lot NumberUNKNOWN
Was Device Available for Evaluation? No
Is the Reporter a Health Professional? Yes
Initial Date Manufacturer Received Not provided
Initial Date FDA Received09/28/2018
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 Initial
Patient Sequence Number1
Patient Outcome(s) Other; Required Intervention;
Patient Age82 YR
-
-