The investigation determined that discordant vitros tropi es results were obtained from multiple samples from a single patient when compared to an alternative vitros troponin reagent lot and to a non-vitros method processed on a vitros eci immunodiagnostic system.The customer did not provide any historical quality control results; however, the customer reported that qc fluid performance over the testing period was acceptable; therefore, a vitros tropi es reagent issue is unlikely.As the results were consistently high over a two week period and there was no indication that any other patient samples were affected, a calibration or instrument issue is unlikely to be a contributing factor.The most likely assignable cause of the discordant vitros tropi es results is a sample interferent such as human anti mouse antibody (hama) or heterophilic antibody.
|
A customer observed discordant vitros tropi es results from multiple samples from a single patient when compared to an alternative vitros troponin reagent lot and to a non-vitros method, processed using a vitros troponin i es reagent in combination with a vitros eci immunodiagnostic system.Patient results 10.1, 19.2, 26.2, 21, 20.9, 16.6, 19.8, 13.7, 22, 13, 11, 17, 14.8, 11.8, 15.3, 15.3, 18.2, 1.68, 1.95, 2.7, 1.91, 2.04, 1.75, 2.18, 3.45 versus expected result 0.01 ng/ml determined by a non-vitros method.Biased results of the direction and magnitude observed may lead to inappropriate physician action if undetected.The discordant results were reported outside of the laboratory and the customer stated that medication was administered based on these results.Ortho has not been made aware of any allegation of patient harm.This report is number two of two mdr¿s for this event.Two 3500a forms are being submitted for this event as two devices were involved.(b)(4).
|