H11: section a through f - the information provided by bd represents all of the known information at this time.Despite good faith efforts to obtain additional information, the complainant / reporter was unable or unwilling to provide any further patient, product, or procedural details to bd.The following were reviewed as part of this investigation: patient severity, complaint and batch history, labeling, applicable manufacturing records, sample analysis and applicable fmea documents.Based on a review of this information, the following was concluded: the complaint of a difficult to split sheath was confirmed and appears manufacturing related.The product returned for evaluation was a 4.5fr microintroducer sheath.The handles of the introducer had been split and the sheath had been split down one side.On the handle containing the fr size indicator, the sheath material had split circumferentially, approximately at the distal end of the handle.The edge of the split was angular and contained irregular break edges; the longer section of the sheath had broken at the end of the handle while the shorter pieces broke within the handle, 0.06¿ from the distal end of the handle.The handle with the ¿bard¿ indicator contained the rest of the sheath.The sheath material had split all the way, longitudinally on one side.The complete longitudinal tear revealed that the first 0.8¿ of the split, the edges were curled, the last part of the split was very straight.The other side contained a very small longitudinal split (0.09¿ long).Both handles contained evidence that the handles had not split easily, as the break surface of the handles was not a clean straight break.Instead each handle had sections of material that had stretched and broken, as evidenced by the thinness of the material and the crazing seen in the material.The poor breakability and peelability will be considered manufacturing related.H3 other text : evaluation findings are in section h.11.
|