A maude event report (mw5040230) was received on (b)(6) 2015.The wife of the end user/patient was contacted to obtain details of the event as follows: on (b)(6) 2014, the patient tested on the inratio device and received an inr of 2.5.The patient's therapeutic range was 2.0 - 3.0.Ten (10) days later, on (b)(6) 2014, the patient experienced somnolence, global aphasia and right hemiplegia.Upon arrival to the hospital, the laboratory inr was 2.1 and the patient was reported to have experienced a massive stroke due to a clot in his left middle cerebral artery.A clot was removed by the neuroradiologist within ninety (90) minutes of symptom onset.Following the clot removal, the patient spent one (1) week in acute care and two (2) weeks in rehabilitation.The patient has since been released home.The patient has recovered his speech, however, he continues to have receptive aphasia and severe gait deviations and instability.The wife reported that this has improved over time but is still present.Following the hospitalization, the patient has changed to xalerto and is no longer using the inratio device.The wife reported that there was no problem with the device, but just wanted to report the episode since she had received the alere inratio pt/inr monitor system urgent medical device correction notification, dated (b)(6) 2014.There is no information available to suggest a malfunction or that the device caused or contributed to the reported event.The patient's coagulation status was unknown at the time of the event.The last inratio inr was ten (10) days prior to the event.The coagulation status can significantly change during this period of time.Based on the inability to rule out the possibility that the device may have caused or contributed to the clotting, this event is conservatively reported as a serious injury based on the blood clot being potentially related to the patient's coagulation status; however, a device deficiency cannot be substantiated.There was no additional information provided.
|
(b)(4).Investigation/conclusion: the customer's wife was unable to provide a lot number and no products were returned for investigation.Since the product(s) associated with the complaint was not returned and a lot number was not provided, manufacturing record review could not be performed and further investigation was not possible.There is no information available to suggest a malfunction or that the device caused or contributed to the reported event.The patient's coagulation status was unknown at the time of the event.The last inratio inr was ten (10) days prior to the event.The coagulation status can significantly change during this period of time.Based on the inability to rule out the possibility that the device may have caused or contributed to the clotting, this event is conservatively reported as a serious injury based on the blood clot being potentially related to the patient's coagulation status; however, a device deficiency cannot be substantiated.
|