Upon device inspection no malfunction of the operating light system was identified and the event could not be duplicated.It is known and clearly indicated within the instructions for use that overlapping of two or more light fields may lead to tissue damage and cannot be ruled out as not occurring for this event.Initial inspection noted the product to be functioning as designed, however, additional investigation is pending.Therefore, (b)(6) is cautiously reporting this event due to the serious injury involved.If additional information will become available a follow-up report will be submitted.
|
The customer alleged post-surgery the surgical team noted an oblong red wound on the medial side of the patient¿s left breast, which was initially thought to be due to the adhesive.When the patient returned to the clinic for her post-op visit a plastic surgery consult was performed.The wound was diagnosed as a third-degree burn, silvadene cream was applied, and they plan to monitor the patient for next steps.The customer states a wound graft is possible for future treatment.It is believed by the customer the operating light system iled 7 which was used during the surgical procedure caused or contributed to the injury.This report was filed in our complaint handling system as complaint # (b)(4).
|