|
As reported, the patient lost 500 ml of blood caused by poor contraction of the lower segment of the uterus after a normal delivery.The bakri tamponade balloon catheter was placed vaginally as treatment of postpartum hemorrhage [pph] and then the balloon was injected with saline solution to a volume of 200 ml.And found the balloon to be leaking, which was then replaced with a new balloon and successfully stopped the hemorrhage.After the leakage occurred, the patient lost 400ml of blood after the device failure.For a total estimated blood loss of 900 ml.The device was not handled by or in the proximity of any metal tools.The patient did not receive any blood transfusions.No section of the device remained inside the patient's body.The patient did not require any additional procedures due to this occurrence.The complainant has not reported any adverse effects on the patient due to this occurrence.
|
|
Investigation-evaluation: description of event: as reported, the patient lost 500 ml of blood caused by poor contraction of the lower segment of the uterus after a normal delivery.The bakri tamponade balloon catheter was placed vaginally as treatment of postpartum hemorrhage [pph] and then the balloon was injected with saline solution to a volume of 200 ml.And found the balloon to be leaking, which was then replaced with a new balloon and successfully stopped the hemorrhage.After the leakage occurred, the patient lost 400 ml of blood after the device failure.For a total estimated blood loss of 900 ml.The device was not handled by or in the proximity of any metal tools.The patient did not receive any blood transfusions.No section of the device remained inside the patient's body.The patient did not require any additional procedures due to this occurrence.The complainant has not reported any adverse effects on the patient due to this occurrence.Reviews of the complaint history, device history record (dhr), instructions for use (ifu), and quality control (qc) procedures, of the device, were conducted during the investigation.The complaint device was not returned for evaluation.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 non-conformances related to the reported failure mode.A review of complaint history records shows no other related complaints associated with 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 that the device was manufactured to specification and there is no evidence that nonconforming product exists in house or in the field.Cook also reviewed product labeling.The product ifu, provides the following information to the user related to the reported failure mode: how supplied "upon removal from the package, inspect the product to ensure no damage has occurred." 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.
|