(b)(4).Batch # unk.The lot/batch was not provided; therefore, a manufacturing record evaluation could not be performed.Attempts are being made to obtain the following information and the device: which vessel did the clip fall off of? how many clips were placed on the vessel? were there any device issues identified in the initial procedure? were there any device issues identified in the re-operation procedure? how was bleeding identified? were there any clip formation issues in the initial procedure? were there any clip formation issues in the re-operation procedure? please clarify: in the event, you reported the patient had a post-op complication and was brought back to the o.R., but on the complaint submission tool form, you answered no to the following question: ¿did the patient require revision surgery or hardware removal? ¿ no.¿ did the patient have re-operation for post-op complication of bleeding? did the patient have any other surgical procedure besides the initial lap chole procedure and re-operation procedure? to date no response has been provided and no device has been received.If the device or further details are received at a later date, a supplemental medwatch will be sent.
|
It was reported that post-op, after a laparoscopic cholecystectomy, the surgeon was called after patient had a post-op complication.Patient was brought back to o.R.For re-operation and surgeon realized the clip fell off and the belly was full of blood.Surgeon switched to an applied clip applier.The applied product scissored and surgeon asked for an er420.The patient recovered and has been discharged according to the surgeon.
|