| Model Number |
8884710859E |
| Medical Device Problem Code |
Detachment of Device or Device Component (2907)
|
| Health Effect - Clinical Code |
Foreign Body In Patient (2687)
|
| Date of Event |
10/08/2024
|
|
Type of Reportable Event
|
Malfunction
|
|
Event or Problem Description
|
|
The customer reported the patient had a weighted stylet 8 french nasogastric tube (ngt) placed and confirmed by chest x-ray (cxr).When changing the nose securement, it was noticed that the external length tick mark at the nare had a discrepancy of 8cm.Placement length was 57cm, previous shifts had documented 60cm, but nurse confirmed length of 65cm.Imaging was completed, showing that the weighted tip and tubing had become disconnected.The nurse was advised to retract the ngt by 5cm (from 65cm to 60cm) and then do a repeat kidney, ureter, and bladder (kub).The 2nd kub confirmed that the weighted tip and tubing had indeed come apart, and the weighted tip was floating freely in the stomach.It was expected that the patient would pass the tip.
|
| |
|
Additional Manufacturer Narrative
|
|
An investigation is currently underway.Upon completion, the results will be forwarded.
|
| |
|
Event or Problem Description
|
|
The customer reported the patient had a weighted stylet 8 french nasogastric tube (ngt) placed and confirmed by chest x-ray (cxr).When changing the nose securement, it was noticed that the external length tick mark at the nare had a discrepancy of 8cm.Placement length was 57cm, previous shifts had documented 60cm, but nurse confirmed length of 65cm.Imaging was completed, showing that the weighted tip and tubing had become disconnected.The nurse was advised to retract the ngt by 5cm (from 65cm to 60cm) and then do a repeat kidney, ureter, and bladder (kub).The 2nd kub confirmed that the weighted tip and tubing had indeed come apart, and the weighted tip was floating freely in the stomach.It was expected that the patient would pass the tip.Per additional information provided by the reporter on 23jan2025, the device was replaced with a new one.The patient was expected to pass the tip, but passed away due to his critical underlying illness; the device retention was not related to the patient's death or worsening of his condition.
|
| |
|
Additional Manufacturer Narrative
|
|
The device history record (dhr) could not be reviewed as no lot information was provided within the complaint.Prior to a lot¿s release, the lot must be deemed acceptable by passing inspections that are based on a valid sampling plan.During production, inspectors routinely examine a statistical sample both physically and visually.There were no samples returned for evaluation; therefore, the affected device could not be evaluated to confirm the reported failure mode.As such, a root cause could not be determined.We will continue to monitor related reports to determine if additional actions are necessary.
|
| |
|
Search Alerts/Recalls
|