| Catalog Number |
66020799 |
| Medical Device Problem Codes |
False Alarm (1013); Obstruction of Flow (2423)
|
| Health Effect - Clinical Code |
Impaired Healing (2378)
|
| Date of Event |
09/11/2023
|
|
Type of Reportable Event
|
Serious Injury
|
|
Event or Problem Description
|
|
It was reported that, during npwt a renasys go continues to alarm blockage/full canister, specifically on sundays.The wounds are filled with gauze.Patient has dressing changes and when she goes to he providers office on fridays the gauze which is packing the wound is filled with drainage and the wound continues to need debrided, patient states that they can see the edges of the wound are whit again and the wound is not healing.Patient is concerned that the pooling is preventing healing in addition to the blockage alarms.It is unknown how the therapy was finished; however, no delays were reported.No further information is available.
|
| |
|
Additional Manufacturer Narrative
|
|
Internal reference number case (b)(4).
|
| |
|
Event or Problem Description
|
|
It was reported that, following a hip surgery performed on (b)(6) 2023, a patient was initiated on npwt with a renasys go on three wounds all relatively together.The wounds were filled with gauze.The dressings are changed on mondays, wednesdays and fridays.On (b)(6) 2023, the patient notified the nurse that the dressing was getting saturated, so the patient went to the hospital for a wet-to-dry dressing change.On (b)(6) 2023, the patient has reported that, following fridays' visits to providers, the following sundays the pump displays the blockage / canister full alarm and that the gauze is filled with drainage.The device is always alarming blockage until patient milks the soft port.Also, the patient states that the edges of the wound are white again, and not healing, so is expressing the concern that the pooling is preventing healing.The doctor has already done two debridement procedures.
|
| |
|
Additional Manufacturer Narrative
|
|
H3, h6: the device was not returned for evaluation.Documentary review.A review of the complaint history has revealed a number of similar cases, there are no open or closed escalation actions for this combination of product and failure mode.A review of the device history record could not be conducted as no batch or lot number was supplied.The risk management documentation for the renasys dressings has been reviewed to assess whether the alleged failure and associated foreseeable harms have been anticipated.Risk documentation contains multiple failures leading to reduced npwt and reduced exudate removal resulting in maceration and delayed wound healing.The instruction for use provides adequate guidance, the ifu does warn, ¿inspect connections, tubing and soft port aeration disc (located on soft port, near the orange quick click connector) to ensure they are free of obstructions.Npwt devices are not designed to detect or issue an alarm condition based on the presence of bleeding or pooling.Medical review concluded based on the limited documentation provided, no clinical factors have been provided that would have contributed to the reported mechanical issues of the device.However, we cannot rule out the patient¿s history of diabetes as contributing factor to the reported impaired healing.It is unknown if the ifu for the renasys go device was adhered to.The impact to the patient was the fluid leaking, pooling, dressing changes, the wound debridement¿s and additional renasys go device.The future impact would include, dressing changes, the third debridement, office visits and continued npwt.Therefore, no further clinical/medical can be rendered at this time.The probable cause regarding the blockage is that the device has alarmed blockage as designed, the alarm was resolved by milking of the softport as detailed in the event description no manufacturing, packaging, labelling, design, concerns nor adverse trend have been observed, therefore no corrective actions are deemed necessary.
|
| |
|
Search Alerts/Recalls
|
|