It is reported during tamponade of the uterus to treat post-partum hemorrhage after a cesarean section, a cook bakri postpartum balloon with rapid instillation components split vertically whilst insitu before transferring out of the operating room.A second bakri device was placed to complete the procedure.No unintended section of the device remained inside the patient.The patient did not experience any adverse effects as a result of this alleged product malfunction.Additional details regarding the patient and event have been requested.At this time, no additional information has been provided.
|
Additional information: investigation ¿ evaluation.A visual inspection of the returned device was conducted.A document based investigation was also performed including a review of complaint history, the device history record, quality control data, review of ifu, and manufacturing instructions.The complainant returned one open package containing a bakri postpartum balloon for investigation.Reported lot number confirmed.Visual examination confirmed the balloon catheter was received in used condition.The balloon material is split 7cm in a perpendicular direction.A jagged area was observed 4.5cm of the proximal end of the split.Device history record (dhr) review for this lot shows no non-conformances determined to be related to this incident.A review of complaint history revealed no other complaints associated with the complaint device lot number.Instructions for use (ifu) warns the maximum inflation is 500ml.Do not overinflate the balloon.Balloon should be inflated with sterile liquid.Balloon should never be inflated with air, carbon dioxide or any gas.The ifu also precautions to avoid excessive force when inserting the balloon into the uterus.Based on the investigation evaluation, there is no indication that a design or process related failure mode contributed to this event.Current controls for manufacturing are in place to assure functionality and device integrity prior to shipping.Review of production and quality documentation did not observe any specific issues with current manufacturing or quality controls that may have contributed to this incident.Most probable cause device damaged during use based on the available information, the most likely cause of the event was determined to be unintended use error.Per the quality engineering risk assessment, no further action is warranted.The appropriate internal personnel have been notified and we will continue to monitor for similar complaints.This report is required by the fda under 21 cfr part 803.This report is based on unconfirmed information submitted by others.Neither the submission of this report nor any statement made in it is intended to be an admission that any cook device is defective or malfunctioned; that a death or serious injury occurred; or that any cook device caused or contributed to; or is likely to cause or contribute to a death or serious injury if a malfunction occurred.
|