|
This spontaneous report was received from a physician who assisted during vacuum-induced hemorrhage control system (jada system) use via company representative (reported as clinical account manager) referring to a female patient of unknown age.The patient's historical conditions included pregnancy and cesarean section (c/s) delivery.Patient lost 2200 cubic centimeter (cc) of blood prior to vacuum-induced hemorrhage control system (jada system) being inserted.The patient's concomitant medications, and drug reactions/allergies were not reported.This report concerns 1 patient and 1 device.On (b)(6) 2022, the patient underwent insertion procedure with vacuum-induced hemorrhage control system (jada system) (strength, route of administration, lot# and expiration date were not reported) for postpartum haemorrhage (reported as 2200 cc of blood lost prior to vacuum-induced hemorrhage control system (jada system) being inserted).Placement of vacuum-induced hemorrhage control system (jada system) was confirmed with ultrasound.On (b)(6) 2022 (also reported as occurred overnight on (b)(6) 2022), once vacuum-induced hemorrhage control system (jada system) was placed, the patient continued to bleed heavily and lost 1400 cc further until vacuum-induced hemorrhage control system (jada system) was discontinued on (b)(6) 2022, 15 minutes after insertion (device ineffective).The reporter did say that she saw the suction regulator reading 60 millimeters of mercury (mm hg) and suggested they turn the suction up, but the tech said the canister was being forcefully sucked in and felt the suction may have been "up all the way" (wrong technique in device usage process).The patient had a hysterectomy to control postpartum haemorrhage.No additional information was provided at the time of report.Upon internal review, the events of "device ineffective" and "wrong technique in device usage process" were determined to be serious due to required intervention (devices).Medical device reporting criteria: serious injury.(b)(4).
|