|
Updated fields: d4, d9, g3, g6, h2, h3, h4, h6, h11.Corrected field: h6 (impact codes).A duplicate report was submitted for this complaint event under mfg report number 2648988-2025-00011.Consequently, no follow-up mdr will be submitted for duplicate mfg report number 2648988-2025-00011- see below for the findings of our investigation.See missing information below which was not previously reported under mfg report number 2648988-2025-00006: a physician reported that while attempting to place hermetic lumbar catheter, closed tip (ins5010) for drainage, the catheter sheared while trying to reposition.A piece of the catheter remained in the patient.1.What type of procedure was performed? answer: spinal drain was requested prior to tevar.2.When was the product problem discovered (during inspection, before/during/after a procedure)? answer: during the procedure.3.What actions were implemented when the device broke? (search fragments, removing fragments, radiographic testing¿) if applicable, describe actions.Answer: access needle was inserted into the spinal canal without difficulty.Lumbar drain was inserted without difficulties.However, the tip of catheter curled a bit.When i was trying to reposition the catheter, the catheter was noted to be fractured.No resistance was felt during the procedure and repositioning.I immediately consulted neurosurgery.The procedure was aborted.Ct lumbar spine was performed immediately to locate the fragment.Mri lumbar spine was also performed, but the catheter was not visualized on the mri scan.4.Was the patient under anesthesia when the device broke? answer: moderate sedation.5.Was there a delay in surgery due to product problem? if yes, how long? answer: yes, 3 days.6.Was there any patient adverse consequence because of the delay? if yes, please explain.Answer: no.Patient has some weaknesses in bilateral legs after tevar but doesn't seem to be related to the retained fragment.The patient has been followed by neurosurgery immediately after the incident as well as in outpatient visit.7.Was there any anatomical feature, condition, and/or anomaly that could make difficult the catheter insertion or repositioning? answer: no.8.Was the tuohy needle removed prior to repositioning the catheter? answer: no.9.Did they remove the piece of catheter that remained in the patient? answer: no.10.Patient status/outcome.Initially no symptoms.A new lumbar drain was placed 3 days later, and tevar was performed 4 days later.After answer: tevar, patient experience intermittent bilateral leg weakness.11.Is the product available for return? answer: no.We have submitted the product to risk management in our hospital.Investigation findings: hermetic lumbar catheter (ins5010) was not returned, and no photos of the catheter were provided to evaluate and determine the definite root cause.Lot number information has been provided; therefore, device history record (dhr) was reviewed and no anomaly was observed during its manufacturing, packaging, and inspection processes that could be related to the reported condition.A possible cause for the reported event could be related to manipulating or repositioning the catheter through the tuohy needle during its insertion.If additional relevant information becomes available in the future, this complaint will be reopened, and the respective evaluation performed.Trends will be monitored for this and similar issues.At present, we consider this complaint to be closed.
|