|
The customer reported a false negative result of a patient sample with the anti-b of erytype s abd+rev.A1, b when used on tango infinity.The customer stated that the reaction looked like mixed field.The customer provided the complaint sample and also the patient sample for investigational testing.Our quality control laboratory tested the complaint sample with donor samples and the patient sample provided by the customer on tango infinity.The donor samples showed correctly positive and negative reactions.The patient sample could not be correctly evaluated by the tango instrument because the amount of pipetted red blood cells was insufficient.A repeat testing was not possible, because the complaint sample was used up.Our quality control laboratory had tested the same donor samples and the patient sample with the retention sample of the supposedly defective lot on tango infinity.Again, the donor samples showed the correct positive and negative reactions.The patient sample showed a very small agglutinate with the anti-b which was assessed as negative by the instrument.Additionally, the patient sample was tested with seraclone anti-b in the tube test (immediate spin) and showed a negative result.Furthermore, the patient sample was tested in the gel card.The patient sample showed double population with antia and anti-ab.The patient sample showed only a few small agglutinates with the anti-b on top of the gel column and a pellet at the bottom.A review of the batch record documentation showed no irregularities which might have negatively affected the quality of the allegedly defective lot.The customer provided a result image that shows a mixed field reaction in the anti-b well.Because the whole background was dark red colored, the result was interpreted as a negative reaction by the instruments software of image evaluation.No overall result was given by instruments software as there was a discrepancy discovered.The last preventative maintenance was conducted on may 21, 2021.A field service engineer checked the affected tango infinity.He collected log files and databases.He checked the instrument function and camera settings.He also performed metrology within specifications.The instrument was confirmed to be operating within manufacturer specification and returned to full operation.Metrology qualification was performed with passing all the significant checks and qc.The log files did not show any issue relevant abnormalities.From instrument's perspective, based on current information and data there is no indication for an instrument malfunction.The qc passed at the day of issue.No false result was released because the discrepancy was identified by the instruments software.Furthermore, customer may refer to the user manual's statement: "mixed field reaction can lead to an erroneous result with automated analysis of erytype s assays." the field service engineer confirmed that the instrument is working within specification based on the images provided by customer and the investigation the complaint was classified as confirmed - epp (expected product performance).The complaint and the retention sample reacted as expected.Only the patient sample showed a mixed field reaction which was assessed as a negative reaction by the tango instrument.A review of the batch record documentation showed no irregularities which might have negatively affected the quality of the allegedly defective lot.(b)(4).
|