| Catalog Number |
04775201973 |
| Medical Device Problem Code |
Low Test Results (2458)
|
| Health Effect - Clinical Code |
No Clinical Signs, Symptoms or Conditions (4582)
|
| Date of Event |
10/08/2023
|
|
Type of Reportable Event
|
Malfunction
|
|
Additional Manufacturer Narrative
|
|
The serial number of the customer's cobas e 411 rack cu is (b)(6).The investigation is ongoing.
|
| |
|
Event or Problem Description
|
|
The initial reporter received a questionable elecsys hcg+b result from one patient sample tested on the cobas e411 rack cu.The initial result was auto-verified and was reported outside of the laboratory.The result was corrected quickly as the reporter knew that the patient had a pregnancy status and a point of care (poc) test was positive.The reporter used the same plasma tube and another serum sample tube from the patient for the reruns.The initial result of the plasma sample was 2 miu/ml.The first repeat result from the plasma sample was >10,000 miu/ml.The second repeat result from the serum sample was >10,000 miu/ml.The repeat results were deemed correct. .
|
| |
|
Additional Manufacturer Narrative
|
|
Medwatch fields d.Device identification, g1 and g4 pma / 510k (premarket numbers) were updated.The investigation reviewed the calibrations performed on 21-sep-2023 (before the event) and 26-nov-2023 (after the event); the results were within specifications.The investigation reviewed the qc recovery; the qc qc recovery was within the customer¿s established ranges.There was no indication of a performance issue with the reagent.The investigation reviewed the customer's handling of patient samples; the patient sample was centrifuged at 3600 rpm for 5 minutes.The centrifugation time may be too short and the speed may be too high as per the tube manufacturer¿s recommended guidelines.On the field service engineer's (fse) initial service visit, he inspected the analyzer and could not find a cause for the issue but noted that the measuring cells were aged.He also noted that the customer stated that sample quality/integrity was questionable because the staff who ran the reported patient sample was inexperienced.On the fse's follow-up service visit, he replaced the measuring cells.He verified the analyzer's performance by mechanical, instrument, and precision checks.The customer performed calibrations and qcs.After service, no further issues were reported by the customer.The investigation determined the service actions resolved the issue.
|
| |
|
Search Alerts/Recalls
|