The user facility did not return the actual device to the manufacturer for investigation and evaluation.Retained samples for production lots shipped to the user facility were evaluated for structural integrity.Application of moderate lateral force to the lifeport body and connections had no effect.The lifeports reviewed were confirmed to meet all production requirements and specifications.Production records for these lots were reviewed with no indication of production issues.Complaint records were evaluated for potential similar events reported, with no similar events reported in the 2 years evaluated.Discussions with user facility staff suggest the event was unlikely a result of device failure, and rather the result of preexisting patient condition.The user facility indicated they evalauted other lifeports in their stock and concluded they were "pretty sturdy" and unlikely to have resulted in the event reported.The most likely cause of the lifeport damage described by the user facility is related to user error in patient management where the lifeport is stressed and cracked/broken through medical personnel action.However, the exact cause of this event could not be determined.
|