Catalog Number SNS-1001 |
Device Problem
Adverse Event Without Identified Device or Use Problem (2993)
|
Patient Problem
Swelling/ Edema (4577)
|
Event Date 10/22/2020 |
Event Type
Injury
|
Manufacturer Narrative
|
The physician assumed that the periorbital swelling is related to the patient's facial trauma history, which allowed the drug application pressure to escape the sinus cavity.The device was inspected by the company's representative after the procedure, and was found intact.No malfunction was detected.Per clinical opinion of this occurrence, it seems that the periorbital swelling that occurred after drug application is linked to the patient's facial trauma history that allowed the drug application pressure to escape the sinus cavity into the eyelid.The combination of the drug's jelly-like state which required higher pressure during application and the unique physiological structure of the patient, following facial trauma, apparently led to the occurrence.Based on this information, device inspection and occurrence circumstances, it is not likely that the occurrence is device related.
|
|
Event Description
|
After maxillary sinus irrigation with a sinusafe device, and after compounded drug application into the sinus, the physician noted periorbital swelling.During application, the drug was not in a liquid state but in a jelly-like state.The treatment was performed under general anesthesia.The compound applied was cpd lev/bud 100mg-0.5mg/10mg, lot number: 4476510, compounded by (b)(6).Upon noticing the periorbital swelling by the user (ent physician), the patient was treated with lamina papyracea puncturing to relieve eye pressure and sent for ophthalmology examination.The ophthalmology examination included a physician check-up and ct scan.The physician reported to the company's representative that the examination verified no orbital damage and no vision damage.He also reported that the ct scan showed that the drug was positioned correctly in the bottom of the maxillary sinus cavity confirming that the drug was administered into the sinus cavity as intended and did not penetrate into the eye cavity.The patient did not require hospitalization.She reported to the physician a history of facial trauma.According to the physician report to the company's representative, the swelling was noted to improve since the procedure as of (b)(6) 2020.No additional intervention was performed.
|
|
Search Alerts/Recalls
|
|