As reported, prior to use during an unknown procedure, the hub of three tuohy-borst large bore clear plastic sidearm adapters separated.The devices were intended to be used with an unspecified scope; however, the valves separated "as soon as water" went through them.The devices did not make patient contact.The reporter believes that the valves were not threaded.One other device of the same type also separated at the hub/valve, prior to use, during the same procedure.That device will be reported under patient identifier (b)(6).A fifth device of the same type was used to complete the procedure successfully.There has been no report of any adverse effect to the patient.
|
Blank fields on this form indicate the information is unknown, unchanged, or unavailable.Description of event: as reported, prior to use during an unknown procedure, the hub of a tuohy-borst large bore clear plastic sidearm adapter separated.The device was intended to be used with an unspecified scope; however, the valve separated "as soon as water" went through it.The device did not make patient contact.The reporter believes that the valve was not threaded.Three other devices of the same type also separated at the hub/valve, prior to use, during the same procedure.Those devices will be reported under patient identifier (b)(6).A fifth device of the same type was used to complete the procedure successfully.Investigation ¿ evaluation: a document based investigation was performed including a review of complaint history, device history record, documentation, drawings, the instructions for use, manufacturing instructions, quality control data, and specifications.The complaint device was not returned; therefore, no physical examinations could be performed.However, a document based investigation evaluation was performed.There is no evidence to suggest the product was made out of specification.The lot number of the device is not known; accordingly, a review of the device history record could not be conducted.This device is not provided with an instruction for use (ifu).A review of relevant manufacturing documents was conducted.It was concluded that the device aspect in question was visually/functionally inspected by quality control and no related gaps in production or processing controls were noted.Based on the provided evidence and the completed investigation, cook has concluded component failure contributed to this incident.Per the quality engineering risk assessment, no further action is warranted.Cook will continue to monitor this device via the complaints database for similar complaints.This report is required by the fda under 21 cfr part 803.This report is based on unconfirmed information submitted by others.Neither the submission of this report nor any statement made in it is intended to be an admission that any cook device is defective or malfunctioned; that a death or serious injury occurred; or that any cook device caused or contributed to; or is likely to cause or contribute to a death or serious injury if a malfunction occurred.
|