H10: manufacturing review: a manufacturing review was not requested as the lot number reported is unknown.Investigation summary: one 28cm glidepath d/l catheter was returned for evaluation.Gross visual, microscopic visual and functional evaluations were performed on the returned device.The investigation is confirmed for the reported deformation issue as a kink was noted on the arterial extension leg of the catheter.Further the investigation is also confirmed for the identified material protrusion and stretched issues as the both the extension legs appeared stretched in the middle portion.A definitive root cause could not be determined based upon the available information.Labeling review: a review of product labeling documentation (e.G.Procedural instructions, indications, warnings, precautions, cautions, possible complications, contraindications, nursing guide, and unit label) did not find any product labeling inadequacy.H10: b5, g3, h6 (device, method).H11: d1, d4(medical device catalog number), h6 (result, conclusion).H11: section a through f ¿ the information provide by bd represents all the known information at this time.Despite good faith efforts to obtain additional information, the complainant/reporter was unable or unwilling to provide any further patient, product, or procedural details to bd.H3 other text : see h10.
|