|
No conclusions can be made.The patient's attorney alleges adverse patient outcome associated with the hernia mesh used to treat the patient.The patient's attorney alleges that the patient had subsequent surgical intervention; however, no details have been provided.No lot number has been provided; therefore, a review of the manufacturing records is not possible.Should additional information be provided, a supplemental emdr will be submitted.Not returned.
|
|
Attorney alleges that the patient underwent surgery for the implant of an unspecified bard/davol perfix plug on (b)(6) 2014.As reported, the patient is making a claim for an adverse patient outcome against perfix plug.Attorney alleges that the patient had subsequent surgical intervention due to the hernia mesh device.It is also alleged that the patient experienced emotional distress and the device was defective.Addendum per additional information provided:
(b)(6) 2014 - patient was diagnosed with left inguinal hernia thereby underwent open repair with implant of perfix light plug.Per operative notes, ¿an incision was made in the left groin.The hernia sac was dissected out.An extra-large perfix light plug was placed into the left inguinal region and secured it with sutures.¿
(b)(6) 2019 - patient was diagnosed with recurrent incarcerated left inguinal hernia, thereby underwent open repair with primary hernia repair.Per operative notes, ¿an incision was made in the left groin.The hernia sac was dissected out.The defect was closed with sutures primarily.¿ (the previously implanted mesh was not visualized during the procedure.).
|
|
No conclusions can be made.The patient's attorney alleges adverse patient outcome associated with the hernia mesh used to treat the patient.The patient's attorney alleges that the patient had subsequent surgical intervention; however, no details have been provided.No lot number has been provided; therefore, a review of the manufacturing records is not possible.Addendum:
h11: this supplemental emdr is submitted to document additional information provided and to correct the product identifier, pma/510(k).Root cause is inconclusive, no conclusion can be made as to the extent to which the implant may have caused or contributed to the patient's postoperative course.Note, the manufacturing date (15-may-2014) is considered to be a best estimate.Updated fields: a2, b3, b4, b5, b7, d3, d4 (product catalog no, udi no, lot no, expiry date), g3, g6, h2, h4, h6, h10, h11
corrected fields: d1 (brand name), g4 (pma/510(k))
note: 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.
|