|
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, applicable previous investigation(s), labeling, applicable manufacturing records, returned sample evaluation, and applicable fmea documents.Based on a review of this information, the following was concluded: the complaint of damaged stylet is confirmed; however, the exact cause is unknown.One 3cg stylet was returned for evaluation.An initial visual observation showed no obvious evidence of use.The portion of polyimide tubing distal of the break site was not returned.Approximately 6 cm of polyimide tubing was still intact proximal of the break site.One kink was observed in the polyimide tubing proximal of the break site.A microscopic observation revealed that no blood residue was observed inside the polyimide tubing.Four magnets were returned outside of the polyimide tubing.The break site was observed to be mostly straight with an uneven fracture surface.The observed fracture features were indicative of catheter and/or stylet kinking, which likely occurred during the insertion process.However, the exact circumstances providing for that type of event were ultimately unknown.H3 other text: evaluation findings are in section h11.
|