| Catalog Number |
0010105 |
| Medical Device Problem Codes |
Defective Device (2588); Patient-Device Incompatibility (2682); Patient Device Interaction Problem (4001)
|
| Health Effect - Clinical Codes |
Adhesion(s) (1695); Hernia (2240); Insufficient Information (4580)
|
| Date of Event |
07/28/2020
|
|
Type of Reportable Event
|
Serious Injury
|
|
Additional Manufacturer Narrative
|
|
No conclusions can be made.The patient's attorney alleges adverse patient outcome associated with the hernia mesh used to treat the patient.The patient's attorney alleges that the patient had subsequent surgical intervention; however, no details have been provided.No lot number has been provided; therefore, a review of the manufacturing records is not possible.Should additional information be provided, a supplemental emdr will be submitted.Not returned.
|
| |
|
Event or Problem Description
|
|
Attorney alleges that the patient underwent surgery for the implant of unspecified bard mesh (bard flat mesh) and bard/davol kugel hernia patch.As reported, the patient is making a claim for an adverse patient outcome against kugel hernia patch which was implanted on (b)(6) 2016.Attorney alleges that the patient had subsequent surgical intervention due to the hernia mesh device.It is also alleged that the patient experienced emotional distress and the device was defective.
|
| |
|
Event or Problem Description
|
|
Attorney alleges that the patient underwent surgery for the implant of unspecified bard mesh (bard flat mesh) and bard/davol kugel hernia patch.As reported, the patient is making a claim for an adverse patient outcome against kugel hernia patch which was implanted on (b)(6) 2016.Attorney alleges that the patient had subsequent surgical intervention due to the hernia mesh device.It is also alleged that the patient experienced emotional distress and the device was defective.Addendum per additional information provided: (b)(6) 2016 ¿ patient was diagnosed with incisional ventral hernia thereby underwent open repair with the implant of kugel patch (device #1).Per op notes, ¿a small bowel herniation which was incarcerated into the hernia sac was noted.The kugel patch(device #1) was placed in the underlay fashion in the sub internal oblique position covering the hernia defect and sutured.¿ (b)(6) 2020 ¿ patient was diagnosed with recurrent incisional ventral hernia thereby underwent robotic repair with the implant of bard flat mesh (device #2).Per op notes, ¿the hernia defect was identified.The adhesiolysis were done.An old piece of mesh (device #1) was left in situ, which appeared to be well incorporated.The bard flat mesh (device #2) was placed inside the abdomen and secured to cooper¿s ligament using sutures.¿.
|
| |
|
Additional Manufacturer Narrative
|
|
No conclusions can be made.The patient's attorney alleges adverse patient outcome associated with the hernia mesh used to treat the patient.The patient's attorney alleges that the patient had subsequent surgical intervention; however, no details have been provided.No lot number has been provided; therefore, a review of the manufacturing records is not possible.Addendum: this supplemental emdr is submitted to document additional information provided.Root cause is inconclusive, no conclusion can be made as to the extent to which the implant may have caused or contributed to the patient's postoperative course.Note: 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.
|
| |
|
Search Alerts/Recalls
|