H10: manufacturing review: a lot history review, a device history record review and complete manufacturing review could not be conducted for the investigation as the lot number is unknown.Investigation summary: the sample was not returned for evaluation, however, a medical record review was performed.The investigation is confirmed for the reported catheter fracture.According to the medical record, approximately two years and six months post port deployment, the patient presented with pain and swelling at the port when the port was injected.On the same day, an attempt was made to retrieve the tunneled port from the patient¿s body.The existing port was accessed.Subsequently venogram was performed.Incision was made through the right chest subcutaneous tissues.The port was freed from the surrounding tissues.The catheter was removed over a wire.The device was replaced.Visual inspection of the catheter showed a break in the catheter, at the location of the neck.A definitive root cause could not be determined based upon available information.Labeling review: a review of product labeling documentation (e.G.Procedural instructions, indications, warnings, precautions, cautions, possible complications, contraindications, nursing guide, and unit label) did not find any product labeling inadequacy.H11: section a through f: the information provide by bd represents all 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.H3 other text : device not returned.
|