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, applicable previous investigation(s), sample analysis, applicable fmea documents, applicable manufacturing records, and labeling.Based on a review of this information, the following was concluded: the complaint of unable to aspirate was confirmed but the exact cause was unknown.The product returned for evaluation was one 4 fr groshong nxt catheter.Microscopic examination of the valve cut was unremarkable and the valve length was measured to be within specification.No potential cause for valve malfunction was observed during microscopic examination.Repeated functional flow tests of the catheter concluded that the groshong valve did not open for aspiration as intended.Infusion tests were successful but the catheter would not aspirate.Following initial valve aspiration testing, the valve was re-lubricated with silicone oil and additional aspiration testing confirmed aspiration.Because application of silicone lubricant established proper valve function, it is reasonable to conclude that a lack of lubricant contributed to the reported event.It is unknown if the lubricant applied during manufacture was affected by the clinical procedure or if the lubricant was affected prior to attempted device use.No further action is required because the reported event could not be related to a deficiency in product manufacture or deficiency while under correct product use.H3 other text : evaluation findings are in section h.11.
|