|
|
| Catalog Number |
1161935 |
| Medical Device Problem Code |
Patient-Device Incompatibility (2682)
|
| Health Effect - Clinical Codes |
Wound Dehiscence (1154); Unspecified Infection (1930); Hernia (2240)
|
| Date of Event |
04/29/2014
|
|
Type of Reportable Event
|
Serious Injury
|
|
Additional Manufacturer Narrative
|
|
As reported, post implant of the xenmatrix, the patient was diagnosed with deep surgical site infection, wound dehiscence and hernia recurrence and underwent reoperation for mesh removal.The clinician has assessed the patient¿s postoperative course as "possibly" related related to the study device and possibly related to the procedure.However, based on the information provided, no conclusion can be made.Hernia recurrence and infection are known inherent risk of surgery.The instructions-for-use (ifu) supplied with the device lists hernia recurrence and infection as a possible complication.Review of manufacturing records confirms product was manufactured to specification.In regards to infection, the warnings section of the ifu states, " if an infection develops, it should be treated aggressively.".
|
| |
|
Event or Problem Description
|
|
Alleged per clinical trial dvl-he-020: on (b)(6) 2014 the subject patient underwent multiple recurrent ventral midline open hernia repair procedure during which a xenmatrix surgical graft was trimmed and placed in underlay fashion through bridging placement using open component separation technique (cst) method, fixated using sutures and fascia closure was not achieved due to bridging mesh.Full skin closure was achieved using sutures.The patient was discharged on (b)(6) 2014.Concomitant procedures include panniculectomy, lysis of adhesion(s), hysterectomy.On (b)(6) 2014 , the subject patient was diagnosed with deep surgical site infection and was treated with intravenous antibiotics/antimicrobials medication.On (b)(6) 2014, the subject patient was diagnosed with ventral midline hernia and underwent additional surgery.The graft was removed due to deep surgical site infection and wound dehiscence, the patient also underwent excisional debridement of abdominal wall and skin was fully closed by wound vac method.The patient was discharged on (b)(6) 2014.About a year later, the wound was eventually closed after split thickness in skin.The ae is clinically assessed to be of moderate severity, possibly related to the study device and possibly related to the procedure and recovered/resolved.The reported adverse event meets the definition of an sae (serious adverse event) and does not meet the definition of uade (unidentified adverse device event).
|
| |
|
Search Alerts/Recalls
|
|
|