| Model Number |
MR170126024S |
| Medical Device Problem Code |
Break (1069)
|
| Health Effect - Clinical Code |
No Clinical Signs, Symptoms or Conditions (4582)
|
| Date of Event |
07/10/2024
|
|
Type of Reportable Event
|
Malfunction
|
|
Additional Manufacturer Narrative
|
|
We are currently waiting for the device to be returned for evaluation.Device was used for treatment, not diagnosis.If information is obtained that was not available for the initial medwatch, a follow-up medwatch will be filed as appropriate.
|
| |
|
Event or Problem Description
|
|
During the mobilization of a patient, the picc broke apart at the connection point.
|
| |
|
Additional Manufacturer Narrative
|
|
The 2.6f vascu picc was returned for evaluation in two pieces.The lumen is separate from the rest of the device.Visual inspection revealed the lumen was torn off at the hub.Under magnification it can be seen that the dual lumen is sufficiently attached inside the hub.Both ends of the lumen were also viewed under magnification.While one is smooth and straight, the other is jagged indicative of being torn.Medcomp engineering and product management further reviewed the device and confirmed the lumen was properly placed in the hub during manufacturing.The jagged end of the lumen is indicative of the thin lumen being pulled with a greater force than it is designed to withstand, causing it to tear.The contract manufacturer conducted a review of the manufacture records for the lot number reported.Their investigation revealed the device was manufactured and inspected according to specification with no non-conformances or abnormalities.The manufacture process includes a 100% leak test performed as a last step in the process.This test would have detected any leaks, holes, or weak spots if it had existed at the time of manufacture.The information provided stated the picc broke "during the mobilization of a patient".There is no evidence of a manufacturing issue.A definitive root cause for the failure could not be determined, however the information provided suggests mishandled device and possible user error may have contributed to the failure of the device.Device was used for treatment, not diagnosis.If information is obtained that was not available for the initial medwatch, a follow-up medwatch will be filed as appropriate.
|
| |
|
Search Alerts/Recalls
|