| Catalog Number |
813111100 |
| Medical Device Problem Code |
False Positive Result (1227)
|
| Health Effect - Clinical Code |
No Clinical Signs, Symptoms or Conditions (4582)
|
| Date of Event |
07/12/2022
|
|
Type of Reportable Event
|
Malfunction
|
|
Event or Problem Description
|
|
The customer reported that reactions with the anti-d of ih-card abo/d(dvi-)+rev a1,b were weakly false positive respectively question mark.The results were supposed to be negative.The customer worked manually using ih-reader 24.The customer announced to shipf the complaint sample ih-card abo/d(dvi-)+rev.A1, b (ref #(b)(4), lot 9145030, exp.2023-03-12) for investigational testing.We are still waiting for this sample to arrive on our premises.The investigation of the retention sample in our quality control laboratory is still ongoing.Data files of the affected ih-reader were requested for analysis.We are still waiting for these files.
|
| |
|
Additional Manufacturer Narrative
|
|
This is our initial report on this incident.
|
| |
|
Additional Manufacturer Narrative
|
|
This is our final report on this incident.
|
| |
|
Event or Problem Description
|
|
The customer reported that reactions with the anti-d of ih-card abo/d(dvi-)+rev a1,b were weakly (1+) false positive respectively question mark when the results were supposed to be negative.The customer worked manually using the ih-reader 24.The customer announced to send in a sample of the allegedly defective product for investigational testing.While we were waiting for the complaint sample to arrive on our premises, our quality control laboratory tested their retention sample.In total we tested 96 ih-cards of the supposedly defective lot, 48 cards on the ih-reader 24 and 48 cards on the ih-1000.The cards tested on the ih1000 were subsequently read on the ih reader 24.Due to the reason for the complaint, the focus was on the testing of rhd negative samples.We observed question mark results on theih-reader 24 (five times) and on the ih-1000 (ten times).All these reactions were visually assessed clearly negative.The question mark results were only observed in the anti-d reagent.We did not observe any 1+ false positive reaction.When the allegedly defective product sample provided by the customer arrived on our premises, our quality control laboratory visually checked the cards.The acceptance criteria with regard to intact sealing, correct filling height, homogeneous gel and the absence of splashes in the reaction chamber were met.But many cards had dirt particles or fine hairs on them.In total we tested 120 ih-cards of the complaint sample, 60 cards on the ih-reader 24 and 60 cards on the ih-1000.The cards tested on the ih-1000 were subsequently read on the ih reader 24.Due to the reason for the complaint, the focus was on the testing of rhd negative samples.Of the 120 tests, a total of 6 question mark results occurred in the anti-d well.Here in the gel column fine dots were visible.Question mark results due to dirt particles occurred in three cases.Qc data of the affected instrument were analyzed.The question mark interpretation on the anti-d wells was confirmed and found to be justified.The image analyses showed high texture identified on the well.Based on the investigation the complaint was classified as confirmed - upp (unexpected product performance).Based on the test results and the analysis of the data files by our quality control laboratory the complaint had to be confirmed.However, the section interpretation of results of the instruction for use contained the following note:" *a very weak reaction is not an expected result for antigen testing.It may indicate that a false positive or a very weak/partial expression of the antigen is present.Further investigation of this sample should be performed before the antigen status is determined." a review of the batch record documentation showed no irregularities which might have negatively affected the quality of the allegedly defective lot.
|
| |
|
Search Alerts/Recalls
|