|
Catalog Number 300100481 |
Device Problems
Failure to Infuse (2340); Pressure Problem (3012)
|
Patient Problems
Bradycardia (1751); Cardiac Arrest (1762); High Blood Pressure/ Hypertension (1908); Low Oxygen Saturation (2477)
|
Event Date 03/01/2023 |
Event Type
Injury
|
Event Description
|
The event occurred on an unspecified date and involved a plum 360 pump.It was reported there were distal occlusion alarms in the nicu and picu.The patient was on continuous renal replacement therapy (crrt) and extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ecmo) for refractory septic shock.The patient had a sudden heart rate drop to 32-34 and hypertension with loss of oxygen saturation and a rapid spike in blood pressure.A code blue was initiated, and compressions performed.During the episode the plum 360 pump alarmed for distal occlusion.The patient was on inotropic and sedation drips.The pump read ¿infusion stopped/back prime prior to restart.¿ the nurses were unable to clear alarms to get the pump to infuse by back priming.Lines re primed and attempted to restart, though same alarms continued to alarm.Switched all drips to alaris pumps due to excessive amount of time required to clear alarms and patient not receiving critically necessary drips while troubleshooting.Ended up switching all drips to alaris.Reporter stated that the nipride drip ran out causing the patient¿s blood pressure to spike and may have caused back pressure on the pumps, possibly causing it to start alarming.After the reported event, the patient was stabilized, and therapy was resumed on a alaris pump.The plum pumps were placed back into circulation the following day.
|
|
Manufacturer Narrative
|
The customer indicated that the device is not available for investigation.However, a comprehensive investigation has not yet been completed.
|
|
Manufacturer Narrative
|
This is a general complaint, where no device was returned to the service hub for analysis and evaluation.Therefore, no visual inspection and functional testing were performed to determine if the device played a role in the adverse event.The 12-month service history could not be reviewed as the customer did not provide the serial number of the pump.Gcm reached out to the customer for the service repair history, but no information was provided.Event logs were not provided.Conclusion: in conclusion, since the device was not returned to the service hub for analysis and evaluation, no visual inspection and functional testing were performed to determine if the device had a role in the adverse event.
|
|
Search Alerts/Recalls
|
|
|