| Catalog Number |
DR8054 |
| Medical Device Problem Code |
Break (1069)
|
| Health Effect - Clinical Code |
No Clinical Signs, Symptoms or Conditions (4582)
|
| Date of Event |
10/22/2023
|
|
Type of Reportable Event
|
Malfunction
|
|
Additional Manufacturer Narrative
|
|
H10: as the lot number for the device was not provided, a review of the device history records could not be performed.The device has been returned to the manufacturer for evaluation.The investigation of the reported event is currently underway.H11: section a through f ¿ the information provided by bd represents all the known information at this time.Despite good faith efforts to obtain additional information, the complainant/reporter was unable or unwilling to provide any further patient, product, or procedural details to bd.
|
| |
|
Event or Problem Description
|
|
It was reported that during an angioplasty procedure, the device was allegedly found to be defective, and the tip was found to be broken.There was no reported patient injury.
|
| |
|
Event or Problem Description
|
|
It was reported that during an angioplasty procedure, the device was allegedly found to be defective, and the tip was found to be broken.There was no reported patient injury.
|
| |
|
Additional Manufacturer Narrative
|
|
H10: manufacturing review: a manufacturing review was not required as this is the only complaint reported to date for this product and lot.Investigation summary: one dorado pta dilatation catheter was returned for evaluation.A circumferential break around the catheter shaft was observed exposing the inner lumen.No other anomalies were noted during the visual evaluation.No functional testing was performed due to the condition of the device.All anomalies observed under microscopic observation.As the returned device shows the evidence of a circumferential break around the catheter shaft, the investigation was confirmed for the reported catheter shaft break.A definitive root cause for the reported catheter shaft break could not be determined based upon the provided information.Labeling review: as the reported event did not allege a labeling or use related issue, a labeling review is not required.H10: d4 (expiry date: 10/2024), g3.H11: section a through f ¿ the information provided by bd represents all the known information at this time.Despite good faith efforts to obtain additional information, the complainant/reporter was unable or unwilling to provide any further patient, product, or procedural details to bd.
|
| |
|
Search Alerts/Recalls
|