| Model Number |
61238BX |
| Medical Device Problem Code |
Material Separation (1562)
|
| Health Effect - Clinical Code |
No Clinical Signs, Symptoms or Conditions (4582)
|
| Date of Event |
11/09/2022
|
|
Type of Reportable Event
|
Malfunction
|
|
Event or Problem Description
|
|
The customer reports during a cysto-ureteroscopy procedure using a uropass ureteral access sheath dilator, the sheath tip broke off inside the patient¿s bladder when the physician was attempting to advance it over the wire into the ureter.The device fragments were retrieved.The patient did not experience any adverse effects as a result of this occurrence.The patient's current condition is reported as "stable".There were no procedural or anatomical challenges that could have contributed to the device breaking.The customer examined a like device still sealed in the package.After trying to wiggle the device inside the package, the device snapped inside the package.Additional comment by physician "additional devices were checked while in the packaging/unopened and showed same defect." one image was provided showing a device broken in the package.Clarifying information has been requested, at this time, no additional information has been provided.The customer stores the devices in sterile core hanging up the way they are designed.Case with patient identifier (b)(6) reports the patient event.Case with patient identifier (b)(6) reports the device broken in the package.
|
| |
|
Additional Manufacturer Narrative
|
|
The device referenced in this report has not been returned to olympus for evaluation (although it is anticipated to be).The investigation is ongoing.This report will be updated upon completion of the investigation or upon receipt of additional relevant information.
|
| |
|
Event or Problem Description
|
|
Additional information: this medical device report (mdr) is related to patient identifier (b)(6).
|
| |
|
Additional Manufacturer Narrative
|
|
This report is being supplemented to provide additional information based on the legal manufacturer's final investigation.A dhr review was performed by the original equipment manufacturer (oem).There was one nonconformity noted for tip outer diameter.The lot was then further reviewed and the lot passed with no other nonconformities.It has been over 4 years since the subject device was manufactured.Based on the results of the oem investigation, the root cause was found to be embrittlement and degradation of the dilator polymer due to variable storage methods and environment exposure in health care facilities.Olympus will continue to monitor field performance for this device.
|
| |
|
Additional Manufacturer Narrative
|
|
The customer returned all available stock, which was (b)(4) units with 6 different lot numbers.The device reported as broken in this complaint was not likely returned, as only unopened devices were returned.A research and development investigation was performed and came up with the following conclusions: uropass dilator tip breakage is proposed to be mainly caused by inconsistent manufacture process of polyethylene (pe) dilator, lot-by-lot.The unfavorable oxidation of polyethylene dilator material is proposed to be occurred during dilator manufacture thermal process cycle, in which the thermos-oxidation could cause brittle fracture of uropass dilator tip materials for special lots.Generally speaking, photooxidation of polyethylene or uropass dilator material could occur during the whole products cycle including sterilization, and shelf life.In other words, it will have affecting on uropass products for every lots but not for special lots.Uropaas dilator tip buckling testing should be very helpful for supplier to check the quality of uropass dilator tip for each lot to make sure if it meets osta specifications or not.The investigation is ongoing.A supplemental report will be submitted upon completion of the investigation.
|
| |
|
Search Alerts/Recalls
|