• Decrease font size
  • Return font size to normal
  • Increase font size
U.S. Department of Health and Human Services

MAUDE Adverse Event Report: BAYER PHARMA AG ESSURE INSERT, TUBAL OCCLUSION

  • Print
  • Share
  • E-mail
-
Super Search Devices@FDA
510(k) | DeNovo | Registration & Listing | Adverse Events | Recalls | PMA | HDE | Classification | Standards
CFR Title 21 | Radiation-Emitting Products | X-Ray Assembler | Medsun Reports | CLIA | TPLC
 

BAYER PHARMA AG ESSURE INSERT, TUBAL OCCLUSION Back to Search Results
Model Number ESS305
Event Type  Injury  
Event Description

This case is a solicited case report received via social media (website) from a member of an essure problems support group in united states on (b)(6) 2015 which refers to a female consumer of unspecified age who had essure (fallopian tube occlusion insert) inserted for contraception (no details reported). The reporter informed a case which occurred with one of the women from the group who was pregnant with essure implanted. She found out she was expecting twins and posted on the group that she lost her babies. Her placenta obtained a tear (metal coils could and did migrate out of fallopian tubes into uterus), she leaked fluid from her placenta at 15 weeks and ended up having to bury 2 beautiful little girls. No additional information was provided. There are two linked child cases: (b)(4). The product technical complaint (ptc) investigation and final assessment were received on (b)(6) 2015. The bayer reference number for the ptc report is: (b)(4). Final assessment: since no product was returned to us for investigation, we were unable to perform an investigation of the actual device involved in this complaint. Typically, we would inspect the micro-insert to look for any manufacturing deficiencies. Since we have no valid lot number for this case, we were unable to conduct a review of the manufacturing batch record. We are unable to confirm any quality defect or device malfunction at this time. Medical assessment: this ptc was initiated due to a lack of efficacy. A contraceptive failure may occur under the use of any contraceptive and is not indicative of a quality deficit per se. No complaint sample was provided for a technical investigation. The technical assessment concluded unconfirmed quality defect. No batch number was reported. Without this information no batch signal cluster review in the gpv database for a more detailed statistical medical evaluation is possible. The reported adverse events are not indicative of a quality deficit per se. In summary, there is no reason to suspect a causal relationship to a potential quality deficit based on this report. Company causality comment: this non-medically confirmed, solicited case report refers to a female consumer who had essure (fallopian tube occlusion insert) inserted and got pregnant with essure. Her placenta obtained a tear (interpreted as placental disorder). Metal coils could and did migrate out of fallopian tubes into uterus (interpreted as device migration). She leaked fluid from her placenta at 15 weeks and ended up having to bury 2 beautiful little girls (interpreted as amniorrhexis and abortion late). The events placental disorder, amniorrhexis and abortion late are serious due to medical importance and unlisted in the reference safety information for essure. Device migration is serious due to medical importance and listed. Pregnancy is non-serious and listed. Unintended pregnancies may occur during any contraceptive use and have been reported in women with essure micro-inserts in place. Also, during essure micro-insert therapy there is a risk that the device could move out of fallopian tubes, this movement could be an expulsion (into uterus or out of the body) or migration (distal fallopian tube or peritoneal cavity). In this case, the exact date and the mechanism of migration and pregnancy are not known. A causal relationship between pregnancy, device migration and suspect insert cannot be excluded. The consumer presented placental disorder (not specified) and amniorrhexis during gestation, which could be an alternative explanation for the death of twins. However, a mechanical interference between essure and the developing pregnancy cannot be excluded. Thus, this case was regarded as incident. No follow-up information can be obtained since this is a social media case. The product technical analysis concluded unconfirmed quality defect. There is no reason to suspect a causal relationship to a potential quality deficit.

 
Manufacturer Narrative

Data correction for us reporting: the code knh was replaced with hhs.

 
Search Alerts/Recalls

  New Search  |  Submit an Adverse Event Report

Brand NameESSURE
Type of DeviceINSERT, TUBAL OCCLUSION
Manufacturer (Section D)
BAYER PHARMA AG
müllerstr. 178
berlin, CA 13353
GERMANY 13353
Manufacturer (Section G)
BAYER PHARMA AG
müllerstr. 178
berlin, CA 13353
GERMANY 13353
Manufacturer Contact
k shaw lamberson
100 bayer blvd.
p.o. box 915
whippany , NJ 07981-0915
MDR Report Key4520906
Report Number2951250-2015-00121
Device Sequence Number1
Product CodeHHS
Report Source Manufacturer
Source Type Other,Consumer,CONSUMER,OTHER
Reporter Occupation Other
Type of Report Initial,Followup
Report Date 01/19/2017
1 Device Was Involved in the Event
1 Patient Was Involved in the Event
Date FDA Received02/17/2015
Is This An Adverse Event Report? Yes
Is This A Product Problem Report? Yes
Device Operator Health Professional
Device MODEL NumberESS305
Was Device Available For Evaluation? No
Is The Reporter A Health Professional? No
Was the Report Sent to FDA?
Event Location No Information
Date Manufacturer Received01/20/2015
Was Device Evaluated By Manufacturer? Device Not Returned To Manufacturer
Is The Device Single Use? Yes
Is this a Reprocessed and Reused Single-Use Device?
Type of Device Usage Initial

Patient TREATMENT DATA
Date Received: 02/17/2015 Patient Sequence Number: 1
-
-