|
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, trend analysis, applicable previous investigation(s), sample (if available), and applicable fmea documents.Based on a review of this information, the following was concluded: the complaint of a leaking catheter was confirmed.The product returned for evaluation was one 3fr s/l per-q-cath catheter.The sample was received with an inlaid stylet.The catheter appeared bunched/curved near the suture wing.An attempt to infuse water through the sample using a 12ml syringe revealed the sample to be patent to infusion; however, two leaks were observed near the suture wing.Tactile inspection of the sample revealed tensile weakness, necking and material discoloration in the vicinity of the leaks.Microscopic inspection of the leak sites revealed two diagonally aligned splits.The split exhibited granular fracture surfaces.Following longitudinal bisection of the sample in the vicinity of the splits, inspection of the inside surface revealed scoring marks and abrasion damage at the split sites.The damage on the inside surface was more extensive than that observed on the outside surface of the catheter wall.The catheter bunching, split features and tensile weakness were consistent with damage caused by traumatic contact between the catheter material and the stylet.Such damage can occur if stylet removal/manipulation is attempted prior to flushing the catheter and if the stylet is removed/manipulated when the catheter is pinched or otherwise constrained.H3 other text : evaluation findings are in section h.11.
|