C.R. BARD, INC. (BASD) -3006260740 POWERPORT ISP M.R.I. IMPLANTABLE PORT, CHRONOFLEX SINGLE-LUMEN, 8F; PORT & CATHETER, IMPLANTED, SUBCUTANEOUS, INTRAVASCULAR
|
Back to Search Results |
|
Catalog Number 1808060 |
Device Problems
Obstruction of Flow (2423); Adverse Event Without Identified Device or Use Problem (2993)
|
Patient Problems
Inflammation (1932); Neck Pain (2433); Swelling/ Edema (4577)
|
Event Date 05/03/2021 |
Event Type
Injury
|
Manufacturer Narrative
|
H10: as the lot number for the device was not provided, a review of the device history records could not be performed.The sample was not returned to the manufacturer for inspection/evaluation.Therefore, the investigation of the reported event is inconclusive.Based upon the available information, the definitive root cause for this event is unknown.The instructions for use (ifu) is adequate for the reported device/patient code(s) and provides general instructions for use, as well as warnings, precautions and potential complications associated with the device.Upon receipt of new or additional information, a follow-up report will be submitted as applicable.H11: section a through f - the information provided by bd represents all of 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.
|
|
Event Description
|
It was reported through the litigation process that sometimes post a port placement, the patient allegedly experienced neck pain and edema.Reportedly, the patient underwent removal of the port due to potential complications of occlusion and malfunction.The current status of the patient is unknown.
|
|
Event Description
|
It was reported through the litigation process that sometimes post a port placement, the patient allegedly experienced neck pain and edema.Reportedly, the patient underwent removal of the port due to potential complications of occlusion and malfunction.The current status of the patient is unknown.
|
|
Manufacturer Narrative
|
H10: manufacturing review: a manufacturing review was not requested as the lot number reported is unknown.Investigation summary: the device was not returned for evaluation.Medical records were not provided.The investigation is inconclusive for the alleged adverse event as no objective evidence has been provided to confirm any alleged deficiency with the power port.Furthermore, clinical event reported in the complaint cannot be confirmed.Based upon the available information, the definitive root cause is unknown.Labeling review: as the reported event did not allege a labeling or use related issue, a labeling review is not required.H11: section a through f - the information provided by bd represents all of 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 : device not returned.
|
|
Event Description
|
It was reported through the litigation process that one year, seven months, and twenty-nine days post a port placement via the right internal jugular vein, the patient allegedly experienced neck pain, edema and developed inflammation.It was further reported that the patient underwent removal of the port due to potential complications of occlusion and malfunction.Reportedly, the port and catheter were removed in their entirety.The current status of the patient is unknown.
|
|
Manufacturer Narrative
|
Manufacturing review: a manufacturing review was not requested as the lot number reported is unknown.Investigation summary: the device was not returned for evaluation.Medical records were provided and reviewed.Approximately one year eight months and twenty-one days post port placement, venous port removal was planned.An incision was made at the site of the indwelling port.The port was exposed with a combination of sharp and blunt dissection.The port and catheter were removed in their entirety.The investigation is inconclusive for the reported occlusion as no objective evidence provided for review.Furthermore, clinical conditions reported in the complaint cannot be confirmed.Based upon the available information, the definitive root cause is unknown.Labeling review: as the reported event did not allege a labeling or use related issue, a labeling review is not required.Section a through f ¿ the information provided 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.
|
|
Search Alerts/Recalls
|
|
|