An outside the united states customer obtained a falsely depressed total bilirubin_2 (tbil_2) result on a newborn child patient sample on an atellica ch 930 analyzer.The erroneous result was not reported to the physician(s).The sample was repeated on the original atellica ch instrument and again repeated on an alternate atellica ch instrument.The repeat results recovered higher than the erroneous result.The repeat results were reported as the correct result to the physician(s).The interpretation of results section of the atellica ch total bilirubin_2 (tbil_2) instructions for use (ifu) states: "results of this assay should always be interpreted in conjunction with the patient's medical history, clinical presentation, and other findings." siemens healthcare diagnostics is investigating.
|
Siemens filed the initial mdr 2432235-2023-00180 on jun 23, 2023.Additional information - jun 27, 2023 and jun 28, 2023: an outside the united states customer obtained a falsely depressed total bilirubin_2 (tbil_2) result on a newborn child patient sample on an atellica ch 930 analyzer.The erroneous result was not reported to the physician(s).The sample was repeated on the original atellica ch instrument and again repeated on an alternate atellica ch instrument.The repeat results recovered higher than the erroneous result.The repeat results were reported as the correct result to the physician(s).After performing investigation on atellica ch and dms aptio, the customer confirmed that the first sampling has been performed on a urine sample (large tube) with a serum label on it, so mislabeled.The second result (correct result) was generated on a small tube which was serum.Based on siemens review of additional information, the probable cause of assay range flagged for total bilirubin_2 (tbil_2) results for the initial run of sample id (b)(6) is most likely due to operator error by running a urine sample incorrectly labeled as serum with sample id (b)(6).The instrument is fully operational.Correction: in section d9 - device returned to manufacturer? was checked in error in the initial mdr.In section b6, patient sample id (b)(6) added was incorrect.The correct sample id is (b)(6).In section h6, the investigation finding, and investigation conclusion codes were updated.
|