|
Model Number N/A |
Device Problem
Adverse Event Without Identified Device or Use Problem (2993)
|
Patient Problems
Hematoma (1884); Pain (1994)
|
Event Date 02/16/2023 |
Event Type
Injury
|
Manufacturer Narrative
|
Lot number: requested, unknown.Expiration date: unknown due to unknown lot number.Udi: unknown due to unknown lot number.Implanted date: device was not implanted.Explanted date: device was not explanted.Device manufacture date: unknown due to unknown lot number.Occupation: rn, clinical education specialist procedural areas.The actual device was not available for return; therefore, an evaluation of the actual device was unable to be conducted.The investigation is currently ongoing.A follow-up report will be submitted once the investigation is complete.The product lot number was not provided by the user facility, which prevented a meaningful review of the device history record.This report is for the second device reported, for the first device reported that was used on the same patient see mdr 1118880-2023-00027.
|
|
Event Description
|
The user facility reported that the involved tr band was used on a patient post-procedure care when a large hematoma developed.It was stated that they did not believe that the device malfunction caused the hematoma, but the result of the physician, multiple access attempts in different areas of the radial artery.The procedure performed was a percutaneous coronary intervention (pci), right radial access.Multiple attempts were made to gain access to the vessel.Once access was gained a 6fr glide sheath slender was used intra-procedurally.A large tr band was placed post-procedure.A hematoma began forming proximal to the tr band.The doctor moved the tr band more proximally to have the space to be able to place another tr band distally.A hematoma was still forming.Manual pressure was applied along with the two tr bands still on, and then a pressure cuff was placed on top of the more proximal tr band and was clamped at a low pressure to aid in compression.The hematoma was controlled, however the patient complained of hand pain.The patient was kept overnight for observation.Multiple tests were performed to make sure the patient's arm was ok.No intervention was needed, and the patient was discharged.The patient was in stable condition.The procedure outcome was a success.The blood loss was less than 250cc's.Additional information was received on 23 feb 2023: the hematoma was observed at 12:45 and 14:09, repositioned the bands and used a manual cuff for pressure, when starting to release air.When the tr bands were applied 15cc's of air were injected into the first band and 13cc's of air were injected into the second band.The tr bands held the injected air and there appeared to be no damage to either of the tr bands.
|
|
Manufacturer Narrative
|
This report is being submitted as follow-up no.1 to provide the completed investigation results.The actual device was not returned; therefore, an evaluation of the actual device was unable to be conducted.The complaint can be confirmed for off-label use since the tr band was used to treat the hematoma.The likely root cause of the hematoma is the result of the physician having done multiple access attempts in different areas of the radial artery.The hematoma is not associated with use of the tr band.The device history record (dhr) could not be reviewed since the lot number was not provided.Currently no action is recommended since this risk evaluation is within the predetermined limits in the failure mode and effects analysis (fmea).
|
|
Search Alerts/Recalls
|
|
|