|
Blank fields on this form indicate the information is unknown, unavailable, or unchanged.Summary of event: it was reported that the balloon of a 'bakri tamponade balloon catheter' ruptured during treatment of postpartum hemorrhage, secondary to placenta previa.The balloon was placed in the patient transvaginally and inflated with 350ml of saline at which time leakage due to balloon rupture was noted.The procedure was completed with a new like-device.The patient had an estimated blood loss of 500ml prior to device use and an additional 100ml after device use; total estimated blood loss was 600ml.The patient did not require any blood transfusions.The device was not tested prior to use and was not handled by or in the proximity of any metal tools that may have damaged the balloon.A section of the device did not remain inside the patient¿s body.The patient did not require any additional intervention due to this occurrence.The patient did not experience any adverse effects due to this occurrence.Investigation ¿ evaluation reviews of the complaint history, device history record (dhr), instructions for use (ifu), and quality control (qc) procedures were conducted during the investigation.Visual inspection of the returned complaint device was also conducted.One device was returned for investigation.Visual exam noted a hole in the proximal bond of the balloon material.Cook has concluded that the device was manufactured to specification.Additionally, a document-based investigation evaluation was performed.A review of the device master record (dmr) concluded that sufficient inspection activities are in place to identify this failure mode prior to distribution.A review of the device history record (dhr) found no related non-conformances reported for lot.A complaint history database search showed no other related complaints associated with the failure mode for the complaint device lot.Because there are no related non-conformances, adequate inspection activities have been established, there is objective evidence that the dhr was fully executed, and no other lot related complaints that have been received from the field, it was concluded that there is no evidence that nonconforming product exists in house or in field.Cook also reviewed product labeling; the ifu supplied with the device states the following in consideration of the reported failure mode: - "how supplied: upon removal from the package, inspect the product to ensure no damage has occurred." based upon the available information, inspection of the returned device, and results of the investigation, cook has concluded that the cause for the complaint could not be established.The appropriate personnel have been notified and cook will continue to monitor for similar events.Per the quality engineering risk assessment, no further action is required.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.
|