| Catalog Number |
0067700 |
| Medical Device Problem Code |
Fluid/Blood Leak (1250)
|
| Health Effect - Clinical Code |
No Clinical Signs, Symptoms or Conditions (4582)
|
| Date of Event |
05/20/2024
|
|
Type of Reportable Event
|
Malfunction
|
|
Additional Manufacturer Narrative
|
|
As reported, simpulse solo suction was leaking.Preliminary evaluation of the returned sample finds that fluid leak was identified presenting from small holes in the irrigation tubing.These holes presented when the cojoined tubing was separated at point of use.Review of the returned sample is currently ongoing, as such no conclusions have been made.When the sample evaluation is completed, a supplemental mdr will be submitted.Review of the manufacturing records was performed and found that the lot was manufactured to specification.Note: section a through f - the information provided by bd represents all of 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
|
|
As reported, the simpulse solo suction/irrigation device was leaking.It was also reported that the leakage occurred at the perforation in the tubing.There was no reported patient injury.
|
| |
|
Event or Problem Description
|
|
As reported, the simpulse solo suction/irrigation device was leaking.It was also reported that the leakage occurred at the perforation in the tubing.There was no reported patient injury.
|
| |
|
Event or Problem Description
|
|
As reported, the simpulse solo suction/irrigation device was leaking.It was also reported that the leakage occurred at the perforation in the tubing.There was no reported patient injury.
|
| |
|
Additional Manufacturer Narrative
|
|
As reported, simpulse solo suction was leaking.Preliminary evaluation of the returned sample finds that fluid leak was identified presenting from small holes in the irrigation tubing.These holes presented when the cojoined tubing was separated at point of use.Review of the returned sample is currently ongoing, as such no conclusions have been made.When the sample evaluation is completed, a supplemental mdr will be submitted.Review of the manufacturing records was performed and found that the lot was manufactured to specification.Addendum: this supplemental mdr is submitted to document the sample evaluation results.Evaluation of the returned sample confirms the fluid leak is presenting from small holes along the irrigation tubing from the two returned used devices.The third lot sample received was evaluated finding no resistance when separating the co-joined tubing and no damage presented.Based on the investigation performed, the most probable root cause is due to the excessive pulling/forces applied when separating the co-joined tubing resulting in perforations presenting in the irrigation tubing.Note: section a through f - the information provided by bd represents all of 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.
|
| |
|
Additional Manufacturer Narrative
|
|
As reported, simpulse solo suction was leaking.Preliminary evaluation of the returned sample finds that fluid leak was identified presenting from small holes in the irrigation tubing.These holes presented when the cojoined tubing was separated at point of use.Review of the returned sample is currently ongoing, as such no conclusions have been made.When the sample evaluation is completed, a supplemental mdr will be submitted.Review of the manufacturing records was performed and found that the lot was manufactured to specification.Addendum: this supplemental mdr is submitted to document the sample evaluation results.Evaluation of the returned sample confirms the fluid leak is presenting from small holes along the irrigation tubing from the two returned used devices.The third lot sample received was evaluated finding no resistance when separating the co-joined tubing and no damage presented.Based on the investigation performed, the most probable root cause is due to the excessive pulling/forces applied when separating the co-joined tubing resulting in perforations presenting in the irrigation tubing.Note: section a through f - the information provided by bd represents all of 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
|