| Model Number |
N/A |
| Medical Device Problem Code |
Break (1069)
|
| Health Effect - Clinical Code |
Foreign Body In Patient (2687)
|
| Date of Event |
10/18/2023
|
|
Type of Reportable Event
|
Serious Injury
|
|
Event or Problem Description
|
|
The user facility reported that they were performing a declot on a fistula when they attempted to remove the involved ik device 7fr sheath, half of it broke off inside the fistula.A snare was used to retrieve it.The patient is stable.The reported event did not result in patient injury and/or require medical or surgical intervention.There is not a direct allegation that the reported device caused or contributed to patient injury and/or need for medical intervention.The event occurred intra-operative.
|
| |
|
Additional Manufacturer Narrative
|
|
A1: patient identifier: requested, not provided.A2: age & date of birth: requested, not provided.A3: patient sex: requested, not provided.A4: weight: requested, not provided.A5: ethnicity: requested, not provided.A6: race: requested, not provided.D6a: implanted date: device was not implanted.D6b: explanted date: device was not explanted.E3: occupation: ir manager.A review of the device history record of the product code/lot # combination was conducted with no finding.The actual device is not available for return.The investigation is currently ongoing.A follow-up report will be submitted once the investigation is complete.
|
| |
|
Additional Manufacturer Narrative
|
|
This report is being sent as follow-up no.1 to provide the completed investigation results.The actual device was not returned; therefore, an evaluation of the actual device was unable to be conducted.The account provided photos of the sheath and the sheath is separated near the sheath tip.The separated part of the sheath is bent and attached to another device.The complaint can be confirmed for sheath separation based on the photos provided by the account.Without a sample, the exact root cause cannot be determined.The likely root cause is withdrawing the sheath during increased resistance led to the separation.Review of device history record (dhr) showed there were no issues noted during manufacture of the product that could have contributed to this complaint condition.Currently no action is recommended since this risk evaluation is within the predetermined limits in the hazard based risk table (hbrt).
|
| |
|
Search Alerts/Recalls
|