It was reported an unknown patient required placement of an ultrathane dawson-mueller mac-loc locking loop multipurpose drainage catheter for a biliary drainage procedure.The operator reports that after performing dilation to the access point, they were unable to insert the device into the patient's body.The operator reported an "equivalent product" was utilized and the procedure was completed successfully.As reported, the patient did not experience any adverse effects or require any additional procedures due to this occurrence.
|
Investigation-evaluation.A review of the complaint history, device history record, instructions for use (ifu), quality control, and specifications of the device were conducted during the investigation.There was no visual inspection completed as the device was not returned to manufacturer.Since relevant dimensions could not be measured against specification, the device cannot be confirmed to be manufactured out of specification.A document based investigation evaluation was performed.The device master record (dmr) has shown that sufficient controls are in place to detect this failure mode prior to release.A review of product labeling was completed.Instructions for use (ifu) are packaged with this device.The product ifu states the following in consideration of the reported failure mode: precautions.Activate the hydrophilic coating, if present, by wetting the catheter with sterile water or saline.For best results, keep catheter surface wet during placement.How supplied: upon removal from package, inspect the product to ensure no damage has occurred.A review of the device history record (dhr) of the lot showed no nonconformances.Relevant catheter subassembly lots were reviewed.Both lots recorded no nonconformances as well.A database search revealed no other complaints from the complaint lot at the time of investigation.Since there are no related nonconformances or other complaints from this lot, there is no evidence that nonconforming product exists in house or in the field.It is possible that patient condition contributed to this event if the patient¿s skin was especially hard or quickly contracted after dilation.It is also possible that unintended use error contributed to this event if either additional dilation or a skin nick was required and not performed.However, since a replacement device was reportedly used with no reported change in procedural technique, neither of these possibilities can be confirmed.Based on the information provided and not being able to inspect the product, a definitive conclusion could not be made.The appropriate personnel have been notified.Per the quality engineering risk assessment no further action is required.Cook will continue to monitor for similar complaints.This report is required by the fda under 21 cfr part 803 and is based on unconfirmed information submitted by others.Neither the submission of this report nor any statement contained herein is intended to be an admission that any cook device is defective or malfunctioned, that a death or serious injury occurred, nor that any cook device caused, contributed to, or is likely to cause or contribute to a death or serious injury if a malfunction occurred.
|