(b)(6) submitted a user facility report (b)(4).Cardioquip followed up with (b)(6) to request the device be returned to cardioquip for investigation.(b)(6) did allow cardioquip's personnel to come onsite but personnel were not given access to the device.Additionally, at the time of this report, the device has not been returned to cardioquip for investigation and any results from testing performed on the device by (b)(6) have not been supplied to cardioquip.Cardioquip is in continuous dialogue with (b)(6) regarding their investigation and potential for the device to be returned to cardioquip at a later date.
|
The manufacturer is reporting the following complaint after a voluntary review of all complaints (reportable or not) since 2016.This report is being filed now, after being scrutinized under a newly revised risk matrix, recently adopted after inspection.The device was found to be contaminated with the same bacteria that caused infection in the patient (burkholderia).Due to lack of access to the device, an investigation on other similar devices at the location had to be performed.The test can conclude that all of the units would be contaminated but unable to decide on whether or not the device caused the adverse event due to the limitations of the investigation performed at the facility, cardioquip is also unable to rule out the possibility of a unified source of contamination for both the heater cooler and the patient, for example, a contaminated water source.
|