|
As reported, prior to patient contact during a percutaneous biliary drainage procedure, the hub/valve of a flexor raabe guiding sheath leaked as the device was flushed with liquid.The patient did not require any additional procedures due to this occurrence.According to the initial reporter, the patient did not experience any adverse effects due to this occurrence.
|
|
Description of event: as reported, prior to patient contact during a percutaneous biliary drainage procedure, the hub/valve of a flexor raabe guiding sheath leaked as the device was flushed with liquid.Investigation ¿ evaluation a document based investigation was also performed including a review of complaint history, device history record, drawings, the instructions for use, manufacturing instructions, quality control data, and trends.The complaint device was not returned; therefore, no physical examinations could be performed.However, a document based investigation evaluation was performed.There is no evidence to suggest the product was made out of specification.A review of the device history record found one non-conformance related to the reported failure mode.The non-conformance was for 1 device that failed leak test non-conformances.The device was scrapped.Adequate inspection activities have been established, there is objective evidence that the dhr was fully executed, and no other lot related complaints that have been received from the field, it was concluded that there is no evidence that nonconforming product exists in house or in field.The instructions for use (ifu), provides the following information to the user related to the reported failure mode: "precautions all interventional or diagnostic instruments used with this product should move freely through the valve and sheath to avoid damage.How supplied upon removal from package, inspect the product to ensure no damage has occurred." a review of relevant manufacturing documents was conducted.It was concluded that the device aspect in question was visually/functionally inspected by quality control and no related gaps in production or processing controls were noted.Based on the provided evidence and the completed investigation, cook has concluded device failure contributed to this incident.Per the quality engineering risk assessment, no further action is warranted.Cook will continue to monitor this device via the complaints database for similar complaints.This report is required by the fda under 21 cfr part 803.This report is based on unconfirmed information submitted by others.Neither the submission of this report nor any statement made in it is intended to be an admission that any cook device is defective or malfunctioned; that a death or serious injury occurred; or that any cook device caused or contributed to; or is likely to cause or contribute to a death or serious injury if a malfunction occurred.
|