|
H11: 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.The following were reviewed as part of this investigation: patient severity, complaint and lot history review, applicable previous investigation(s), sample (if available), labeling, applicable manufacture records, and applicable fmea documents.Based on a review of this information, the following was concluded: the complaint of a broken stylet is confirmed; however, the exact cause is unknown.One 3cg stylet was returned for evaluation.An initial visual observation showed use residue on the returned sample.The distal tip of the stylet was observed to be missing and the core wire could be seen protruding from the break site.Multiple bends were observed in the returned stylet.A microscopic observation revealed the break site was mostly straight but uneven, and the edges of the break were observed to be plastically deformed.The exposed magnet at the break site appeared to have been broken and two of the magnets proximal to the break appeared to have been broken as well.Kinks were observed in the polyimide tubing between each magnet and at the break sites of the broken magnets.The break site of the core wire of the stylet was curved and was observed to taper, which suggested that tensile (pulling) force was a factor in the event.The observed fracture features were indicative of catheter and/or stylet kinking, with tensile (pulling force), which likely occurred during the insertion process; however, the exact circumstances providing for that type of event were ultimately unknown.Evaluation findings are in section h.11.
|