The lot number for the device has been provided.A review of the device history records is currently being performed.The device has been returned to the manufacturer for evaluation.The investigation is currently underway.The information provided by bard 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 bard.
|
After further clinical review, this event was reassessed and determined to be not mdr reportable.Although, this event is not mdr reportable, an initial mdr has already been submitted; therefore, this supplemental report is being submitted to document the change in reportability and additional details.Manufacturing review: a manufacturing review was conducted and there was nothing found to indicate there was a manufacturing related cause for this event.Visual/microscopic inspection: the probe was clean and the aperture was (b)(4) closed.The saline cap was not returned.No other anomalies were noted.The probe was examined via x-ray imaging prior to functional testing.The examination showed both of the front stops to be intact on the front housing.Functional/performance evaluation: the vacuum tubing was returned detached from the rear seal cap on the sample chamber.The vacuum tubing was reconnected to the rear seal cap, however, the tube did not make a tight connection.The inside of the tubing was swabbed and the residue was analyzed.The results indicate that the residue swabbed from the interior of the tubing is an (b)(4) percent match to a known silicone compound.Medical records review: medical records were not provided; therefore, a review could not be performed.Image/photo review: one electronic photo was returned and reviewed.The photo shows a probe sample trap chamber and tubing set.The sample tray/basket is present in the chamber.The vacuum tubing is seen to be detached from the rear seal cap on the sample chamber.Based on the photo review, the reported detachment can be confirmed.Conclusion: one probe was returned for evaluation.Based on the returned device and photo review, the investigation is confirmed for the reported detachment, as the tubing was returned detached from the rear of the sample chamber.The investigation is confirmed a product quality issue, as a minimal amount of silicone was present on the vacuum tubing.The scan of the returned samples indicated that there was silicone present on the probe tubing.Silicone on the tubing most likely contributed to the tubing detaching from the sample chamber.Labeling review: the current instructions for use (ifu) provides general instructions for use of the device, as well as warnings, precautions, and potential complications associated with the device.(b)(4).
|