|
(b)(4).Batch #: unknown.Additional information was requested and the following was obtained: n internal rapid response call was held on (b)(6) 2022 to include post market surveillance, customer quality, marketing, design engineering, quality engineering, and local associates to discuss the various issues.There was oozing throughout the case.The surgeon would do double and triple burns, which is the same technique as they use with the ligasure.At the end of the case, the surgeon did get a little bit of a bleeder and it was sealed with the enseal straight jaw.The case was completed.The patient had to be brought back to the or in the middle of the night with a bleeder.The surgeons believe that it was the enseal¿s fault.There is no device to be returned.The bleeding in the procedure seemed to be at the distal tip and the tissue was pretty thick and dense.Attempts are being made to obtain the following information.To date, no response has been provided.If further details are received at a later date, a supplemental medwatch will be sent: what was the indication of the surgery? what is the surgeon¿s experience with device? were there any generator alert screens during the procedure? what vessels and structures was the device used on? was the surgeon doing 1 or multiple burns on the main vessels? did the user seal to completion with the end tones with each firing? did the user use the latch mechanism? how was the bleeding identified? when was the bleeding identified in relation to the original procedure? what was the source of the bleed? how was the bleeding addressed? what is the patient's current status? an analysis of the product could not be performed since a physical sample was not received for evaluation.An evaluation of the manufacturing record could not be performed as the required product identification number was not provided to complete the evaluation.As part of our company quality system process, all devices are manufactured, inspected, and distributed to approved specifications.
|