|
Blank fields on this form indicate the information is unknown or unavailable.(b)(6).H3: device evaluated by mfg = other (81) - device evaluation has begun; however, a conclusion is not yet available.This report includes information known at this time.A follow-up report will be submitted should additional relevant information become available.This report is required by the fda under 21 cfr part 803 and is based on unconfirmed information submitted by others.Neither the submission of this report nor any statement contained herein is intended to be an admission that any cook device is defective or malfunctioned, that a death or serious injury occurred, nor that any cook device caused, contributed to, or is likely to cause or contribute to a death or serious injury if a malfunction occurred.
|
|
As reported, upon opening a micropuncture transitionless stiffened cannula access set's package, prior to use for a procedure involving placement of a peritoneal dialysis catheter, the device was found to be kinked.The device did not make patient contact.The procedure was completed with an unknown device.The patient did not require any additional procedures due to this occurrence.According to the initial reporter, the patient did not experience any adverse effects due to this occurrence.Upon return and initial evaluation of the device, the distal tip of the outer catheter was split.Prior to use for the same procedure, another micropuncture transitionless stiffened cannula access set was reportedly found to be kinked upon opening the package.Upon return of that device, the tip of the outer catheter was also noted to be split.That event will be reported under patient identifier (b)(6).
|
|
Summary of event: as reported, upon opening a micropuncture transitionless stiffened cannula access set's package, prior to use for a procedure involving placement of a peritoneal dialysis catheter, the device was found to be kinked.The device did not make patient contact.The procedure was completed with an unknown device.The patient did not require any additional procedures due to this occurrence.According to the initial reporter, the patient did not experience any adverse effects due to this occurrence.Upon return and initial evaluation of the device, the distal tip of the outer catheter was split.Prior to use for the same procedure, another micropuncture transitionless stiffened cannula access set was reportedly found to be kinked upon opening the package.Upon return of that device, the tip of the outer catheter was also noted to be split.That event was reported under patient identifier (b)(6).Investigation evaluation: reviews of the complaint history, device history record (dhr), instructions for use (ifu), manufacturing instructions, and quality control procedures were conducted during the investigation.A visual inspection of the complaint device was also conducted.The unused complaint device was returned to cook for investigation.The introducer was bent, approximately 1.5-centimeters from the hub, and the outer sheath was split at the distal tip, altering the smooth transition between the sheath and introducer.A document-based investigation evaluation was performed.A review of the device history record found no relevant non-conformances on the final lot.Three relevant non-conformances were noted on sub-assembly lots; however, all affected product was scrapped.A review of complaint history found no additional complaints for this lot number.The product ifu states ¿upon removal from package, inspect the product to ensure no damage has occurred.¿ a review of the device master record (dmr) concluded that sufficient inspection activities are in place to identify this failure mode prior to distribution.The information provided upon review of the dmr, dhr, ifu, and investigation of the returned device suggests that there is evidence the device was manufactured to specification.Although three relevant non-conformances were noted on sub-assembly lots, all non-conforming product was scrapped, there are 100% inspections in place to capture this non-conformance, adequate inspection activities have been established, there is objective evidence that the dhr was fully executed, and no other lot-related complaints have been received from the field.Therefore, it was concluded that there is no evidence that additional non-conforming product exists in-house or in the field.Based on the information provided and the results of the investigation, cook has concluded that inappropriate transport or storage of the device likely contributed to this event.The risk analysis for this failure mode was reviewed and no additional escalation was required.The appropriate personnel have been notified and cook will continue to monitor for similar events.This report is required by the fda under 21 cfr part 803 and is based on unconfirmed information submitted by others.Neither the submission of this report nor any statement contained herein is intended to be an admission that any cook device is defective or malfunctioned, that a death or serious injury occurred, nor that any cook device caused, contributed to, or is likely to cause or contribute to a death or serious injury if a malfunction occurred.
|