On (b)(6) 2015, a phone call was received from the customer inquiring about calibrating his monitor.The customer alleged discrepant low inratio inr result in comparison to the laboratory inr result.On (b)(6) 2014, the patient's inratio inr was 2.6, which was in his therapeutic range of 2.0 - 3.0.On (b)(6) 2015, the patient noticed bruising from his lower stomach to his genitalia.He was seen in the emergency room where he was hospitalized with a hematoma.The laboratory inr was 7.6.Treatment included administration of two (2) units of plasma and vitamin k.In addition, the patient was started on lovenox.The patient was discharged, from the hospital, on (b)(6) 2015; however, he was unable to recall the discharge inr value.On (b)(6) 2015, the inratio inr was 1.4.The patient was unable to provide the lot number since he used the last strip earlier in the day.There was no additional information provided.
|
(b)(4) investigation/conclusion: the monitor associated with the complaint was returned for investigation.Although the customer did not provide the actual lot number used at the time of the discrepant result, the returned monitor showed that customer utilized strip code la7rn which corresponds to strip lot 353137, with primary product number of 10071.This identifies a lot number that the customer had used with the monitor.This lot was used for internal investigation purposes to evaluate the performance of the inratio pt/inr monitoring system.The complaint was not confirmed during in-house investigation.Investigation of the returned monit using retain strips did not uncover any deficiencies.The monitor and strips continue to meet specification and no product deficiencies were observed.The manufacturing records for the lot were reviewed.The lot met specifications and no relevant non-conformances were documented.An impedance curve analysis was performed to determine if customer's inratio result of 2.6, obtained on (b)(6) 2014, contained a weak slope change.The impedance curve associated with this result appears normal in shape and does not exhibit characteristics of a weak slope change curve.The shape of the curve is consistent with the inratio inr result of 2.6 that was obtained.Internal capa investigation (capa-(b)(4)) has determined that certain patient conditions (e.G.Low hematocrit, elevated plasma proteins) can contribute to discrepant inr results.The customer reported bruising from his lower stomach to his genitalia.The root cause could not be determined from the information provided by the customer.Further investigation will be pursued under capa-(b)(4).
|