ERIKA DE REYNOSA, S.A. DE C.V. CLIC BLOOD CHAMBER; ACCESSORIES, BLOOD CIRCUIT, HEMODIALYSIS
|
Back to Search Results |
|
Catalog Number CL10041021 |
Device Problem
Adverse Event Without Identified Device or Use Problem (2993)
|
Patient Problem
Hemolysis (1886)
|
Event Date 06/19/2019 |
Event Type
Injury
|
Manufacturer Narrative
|
Clinical review: a temporal relationship exists between the hemodialysis treatments performed on (b)(6) 2019 using the 2008 t hemodialysis machine, fresenius bloodlines, fresenius dialyzers, granuflo acid, naturalyte 4000 bicarbonate, fresenius clic blood chamber and the patient¿s hemolysis event requiring hospital admission for blood transfusion.The clinic investigation has not successfully identified the source of the hemolysis.There is no objective evidence of any user error, non-compliance to standard operating procedure, chemical/toxic exposures, or any thermal/mechanical causes.The manufacturer¿s product analysis is pending at the time of this clinical investigation.Therefore, any concomitant fresenius products utilized cannot be excluded as a possible causal or contributory factor in the event.There have been no reported defects with any fresenius products used in relation to this event.There have not been any new reports of any additional hemolysis cases associated with use of fresenius products.The granuflo mix and bicarbonate mix tested had a normal specific gravity according to documentation on clinic logs.Moreover, it was reported there were no conductivity alarms on the 2008 t machines.Electrolyte panels of the final dialysate were also within normal limits.The patient sodium levels were normal.It appears unlikely an osmolar insult from the acid or bicarbonate occurred.The patients were not using the same size or lot of optiflux dialyzers which suggests the dialyzers did not cause the hemolysis event due to the degree of variability.There were no reported blood leaks or defects with any of the optiflux dialyzers used.All 2008 t machines passed pre-treatment and post -event functionality testing.There were no unexpected machine alarms in relation to the event.The cause of the hemolysis cannot be determined.The plant investigation is in process.A supplemental mdr will be submitted upon completion of this activity.
|
|
Event Description
|
An area technical operations manager (atom) reported that a hemodialysis patient experienced hemolysis event.Upon follow up, the hemolysis event appears to have occurred between (b)(6) 2019.The patient¿s pre-hemodialysis treatment labs were drawn on (b)(6) 2019 without any reported issues with the lab specimen.On (b)(6) 2019, the clinic manager reviewed the lab results which were drawn post hemodialysis treatment and noticed the patient had a drop in their baseline hemoglobin from 10.6 to 8.4.The patient was admitted into the hospital on (b)(6) 2019 with a hemoglobin of 6.7 and required a blood transfusion.The patient was discharged on (b)(6) 2019.Further details regarding the patient¿s hospitalization are currently unknown.Reportedly, the patient continues to receive hemodialysis treatments.The patient was reported dialyzing with a fresenius 2008t hemodialysis machine, fresenius bloodlines, fresenius dialyzers, fresenius granuflo acid (2551) 2.0 potassium/2.5 calcium, fresenius naturalyte 4000 bicarbonate, fresenius clic blood chamber and fresenius normal saline.It was reported there were no visual defects or anything unexpected with any of the fresenius products used, as well as no machine alarms, clotting events and/or dialyzer leaks in relation to the hemolysis event.It was reported there was nothing unusual in any of the hemodialysis treatments.There were no visible signs of hemolysis during any treatment such as, translucent/cherry colored blood (which is typical with hemolysis in hemodialysis) or any patient symptoms.The patient completed all their hemodialysis treatments during the timeframe without any adverse effect.Currently, the cause of the hemolysis event is unknown.The actual and companion samples of the fresenius products used between (b)(6) 2019 have been sent to the manufacturer for further investigation.
|
|
Manufacturer Narrative
|
Plant investigation: the actual device was returned to the manufacturer for physical evaluation.The samples were visually inspected and were found acceptable.In addition, the sample was tested in the cycler machine and worked as intended without any abnormalities during the tested period.During the evaluation of the samples was not confirmed the alleged failure stated in the complaint.The device history record (dhr) of this product was reviewed and no nonconformance reports or other abnormalities during the assembly of this lot were found.The product involved was released meeting specifications.In addition, a device history record (dhr) review was performed and verified that the results of the in-progress and final quality control (qc) testing met all requirements.In addition, there are no product malfunction reported, with the information available, it is not possible to determine a causal relationship between the product and the incident.
|
|
Search Alerts/Recalls
|
|
|