|
|
| Catalog Number |
5954113 |
| Medical Device Problem Code |
Patient-Device Incompatibility (2682)
|
| Health Effect - Clinical Code |
Wound Dehiscence (1154)
|
| Date of Event |
10/10/2013
|
|
Type of Reportable Event
|
Serious Injury
|
|
Additional Manufacturer Narrative
|
|
As reported, about one month post-implant of the bard/davol ventralight st mesh, the patient was diagnosed with midline incision wound opening during the period of incisional infection, ae is resolved when treated with medication.The clinician has assessed the patient¿s postoperative course as being "possibly" related to the study device and definitely related to the index procedure, however, based on the information provided, no conclusion can be made.Review of manufacturing records confirms product was manufactured to specification.This mdr represents the ae of midline incision wound opening.An additional mdr was submitted to represent the ae of surgical wound infection.Not returned - remains implanted.
|
| |
|
Event or Problem Description
|
|
Reported per clinical trial (b)(6): on (b)(6) 2013 - subject patient underwent open recurrent midline hernia repair procedure during which a bard/davol ventralight st mesh was implanted with sutures.Full skin closure was achieved using adhesive skin closure.The patient was discharged to home on (b)(6) 2013.On (b)(6) 2013 - subject patient was presented with purulent incisional drainage and diagnosed with surgical wound infection.Subject patient was admitted to hospital for intravenous (iv) antibiotics and culture tested positive for methicillin-resistant staphylococcus aureus (mrsa).Peripherally inserted central catheter (picc) line was placed and patient was treated with intravenous (iv) and oral antibiotics.The subject patient was discharged to home on (b)(6) 2013.Per the study clinician, the reported adverse event has been assessed as moderate in severity, possibly related to the study device and definitely related to the index procedure.The outcome for this ae is reported as recovered/resolved.On (b)(6) 2013, the patient developed midline incision wound opening and the patient was administered with iv and po antibiotics.The reported event end date was (b)(6) 2013.Per the study clinician, the reported adverse event has been assessed as mild in severity, possibly related to the study device and definitely related to the index procedure.The outcome for this ae is reported has recovered/resolved.
|
| |
|
Event or Problem Description
|
|
Reported per clinical trial dvl-he-020: on (b)(6) 2013 - subject patient underwent open recurrent midline hernia repair procedure during which a bard/davol ventralight st mesh was implanted with sutures.Full skin closure was achieved using adhesive skin closure.The patient was discharged to home on (b)(6) 2013.(b)(6) 2013 - subject patient was presented with purulent incisional drainage and diagnosed with surgical wound infection.Subject patient was admitted to hospital for intravenous (iv) antibiotics and culture tested positive for methicillin-resistant staphylococcus aureus (mrsa).Peripherally inserted central catheter (picc) line was placed and patient was treated with intravenous (iv) and oral antibiotics.The subject patient was discharged to home on (b)(6) 2013.Per the study clinician, the reported adverse event has been assessed as moderate in severity, possibly related to the study device and definitely related to the index procedure.The outcome for this ae is reported as recovered/resolved.On (b)(6) 2013, the patient developed midline incision wound opening and the patient was administered with iv and po antibiotics.The reported event end date was (b)(6) 2013.Per the study clinician, the reported adverse event has been assessed as mild in severity, possibly related to the study device and definitely related to the index procedure.The outcome for this ae is reported has recovered/resolved.
|
| |
|
Additional Manufacturer Narrative
|
|
As reported, about one month post-implant of the bard/davol ventralight st mesh, the patient was diagnosed with midline incision wound opening during the period of incisional infection, ae is resolved when treated with medication.The clinician has assessed the patient¿s postoperative course as being "possibly" related to the study device and definitely related to the index procedure, however, based on the information provided, no conclusion can be made.Review of manufacturing records confirms product was manufactured to specification.This mdr represents the ae of midline incision wound opening.An additional mdr was submitted to represent the ae of surgical wound infection.Addendum: this is an addendum to the previously submitted mdr to report the corrected implant date.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.H3 other text: not returned - remains implanted.
|
| |
|
Search Alerts/Recalls
|
|
|