Model Number VASOVIEW HEMOPRO 2 |
Device Problem
Material Protrusion/Extrusion (2979)
|
Patient Problem
No Clinical Signs, Symptoms or Conditions (4582)
|
Event Date 08/19/2021 |
Event Type
malfunction
|
Manufacturer Narrative
|
Trackwise id # (b)(4).Since the device is not available to be returned to us, a technical evaluation cannot be performed.Per our standard sop's, all events are tracked and trended to determine whether or not any trends develop.
|
|
Event Description
|
The hospital reported that during an endoscopic vein harvesting procedure using vasoview hemopro 2, they noticed that a piece of metal was protruding out above the hemo pro jaws.They opened a new device to complete the procedure.No injury.
|
|
Manufacturer Narrative
|
Internal tw# (b)(4).
|
|
Event Description
|
The hospital reported that during an endoscopic vein harvesting procedure using vasoview hemopro 2, they noticed that a piece of metal was protruding out above the hemo pro jaws.No difficulty inserting or retracting device.Device inserted correctly.No bend in shaft.They opened a new device to complete the procedure.No injury.
|
|
Event Description
|
The hospital reported that during an endoscopic vein harvesting procedure using vasoview hemopro 2, they noticed that a piece of metal was protruding out above the hemo pro jaws.No difficulty inserting or retracting device.Device inserted correctly.No bend in shaft.They opened a new device to complete the procedure.No injury.
|
|
Manufacturer Narrative
|
Corrected section: b5- summary.Internal complaint number: (b)(4).Analysis of production: (3331/213/67) the device history records review concluded that there were no ncmrs, rework, or deviations documented for the reported lot number.Based on the dhr/lhr review results, it was determined that there is no relation between the manufacturing process and the reported failure.Historical data analysis: (4109/213/67) the review of the historical data indicates that no other similar complaint was reported for the same lot number and reported failure mode.Trend analysis: (4110/213/67) the overall 24 month product complaint trend data for the period (b)(6) 2019 to (b)(6) 2021 was reviewed.There were no triggers identified for the review period.Communication/interviews: (4111/213/67) communication/interviews were performed to obtain all possible information.Investigation findings (13); investigation conclusions(22): the device was not returned to maquet cardiac surgery for investigation, however a photograph was provided by the account.A visual inspection was conducted.Signs of clinical use and evidence of blood was observed in the plastic tray.The jaws were observed to be intact, no visual defects were observed.A metal piece was observed in the upper portion of the shaft.No other visual defects were observed.Based on the photographic inspection, the reported failure " material protrusion/extrusion" was confirmed, however we are unable to determine when the reported failure occurred due to the non-return of the device.
|
|
Search Alerts/Recalls
|