|
It was reported through the litigation process that two months and eighteen days post a port placement in the right atrial superior vena cava junction via the right internal jugular vein, the patient allegedly developed an infection and the blood culture test resulted positive for staphylococcus aureus bacterial infection as a result of the defective infected port.Reportedly, the defective infected port and catheter were removed from the patient.The current status of the patient is unknown.
|
|
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: the device was not returned for evaluation.Medical records were provided and reviewed.Placement of port was performed for a patient with history of lobular left breast cancer requiring chemotherapy.Prior to the procedure, patency of the right internal jugular vein was confirmed with ultrasound and images recorded.Using real-time ultrasound guidance, the right internal jugular vein was accessed percutaneously, and a guidewire was advanced to the right atrial/superior vena caval junction.A 4 french dilator was then introduced over the guidewire.A skin incision was then made in the right anterior chest wall using blunt dissection.Electrocautery was used to establish hemostasis.The pocket was then irrigated with normal saline solution.The catheter was attached to a powerport.From the pocket and through a subcutaneous tunnel, 8 french catheter was brought and ultimately placed through a peel-away sheath in the right internal jugular vein.Under fluoroscopic guidance, the catheter was advanced to the right atrial/superior vena caval junction.The port was secured in the pocket.The port flushed and aspirated without difficulty.The pocket and venotomy incision were closed.Around three months later, right sided port was noted.Previous incision with edges mostly approximated, but small area that appeared to be opening on medial site was noted.Erythema, warmth, induration was appreciated.Culture results revealed staphylococcus aureus.The same day, removal of port was performed.Through a small incision, the previously placed port was dissected free of the surrounding tissues.The port and attached catheter were removed and inspected.Hemostasis was achieved at the venotomy site with manual compression.The port pocket was inspected and irrigated with saline.The incision was closed with layered absorbable suture and surgical glue.Per the medical record review, it was confirmed the patient had a bacterial infection.However, the relationship between the port and the alleged adverse event is unknown, and there was no device malfunction that was reported or occurred.Based upon the available information, the definitive root cause is unknown.Labeling review: as the reported event did not allege a labeling or use related issue, a labeling review is not required.H10: d4 (expiration date: 08/2024).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.
|
|
It was reported through the litigation process that two months and eighteen days post a port placement in the right atrial superior vena cava junction via the right internal jugular vein, the patient allegedly developed an infection and the blood culture test resulted positive for staphylococcus aureus bacterial infection as a result of the defective infected port.Reportedly, the defective infected port and catheter were removed from the patient.The current status of the patient is unknown.
|