| Model Number |
V+C+PRO, ENGLISH |
| Medical Device Problem Codes |
Device Alarm System (1012); Output Problem (3005)
|
| Health Effect - Clinical Code |
Distress (2329)
|
| Date of Event |
11/16/2024
|
|
Type of Reportable Event
|
Serious Injury
|
|
Additional Manufacturer Narrative
|
|
H6: ventec will perform an evaluation of the device.A follow-up report will be submitted when the investigation is complete as defined by 21 cfr 803.56.
|
| |
|
Event or Problem Description
|
|
The following event was reported to ventec via email by a facility biomedical technician: "respiratory therapy sent me a v+ pro that is reporting too high of pressures.From the little verifications i can do it appears to be working fine on the biomet side of things.But there is clearly a problem.We have had the vent for about 5 months now." the biomedical technician responded to ventec¿s request for additional details by providing the following: "high peak pressures.This vent has greater than 50 pressures.Set up another vent with same settings, peak pressure was significantly lower." ventec then received additional information about the patient and the event from the facility respiratory therapy (rt) clinical coordinator: "no alarms, visual signs of distress (vent desynchrony, spike in vitals) we tried two different vocsns on a test lung with the same settings.This one had significantly higher peak pressures than the other one." ventec then asked what peep was set to vs what reading was observed during the patient event.The rt clinical coordinator advised, "it was set at 10 and reading 10, according to the charting." the rt clinical coordinator advised ventec that the patient exhibited visual signs of distress during the event.The patient was placed on a different ventilator for support and their distress was immediately resolved.The patient survived the reported event.
|
| |
|
Additional Manufacturer Narrative
|
|
H6: the device was evaluated by ventec where the reported issue of high peak pressures could not be duplicated or confirmed.Ventec downloaded the device¿s electronic records (system logs) for analysis, but no discrepancies were observed.Ventec also evaluated the device¿s alarm system and confirmed proper operation, noting that alarms were present when (for example) the patient circuit had become disconnected.Proper device operation was confirmed through functional and performance testing.Ventec's investigation did not reveal any device performance issues which may have contributed to the patient's alleged distress.The cause of the reported issue could not be determined.
|
| |
|
Search Alerts/Recalls
|