| Catalog Number |
5955600 |
| Medical Device Problem Code |
Patient-Device Incompatibility (2682)
|
| Health Effect - Clinical Codes |
Abscess (1690); Adhesion(s) (1695); Bowel Perforation (2668)
|
| Date of Event |
05/23/2019
|
|
Type of Reportable Event
|
Serious Injury
|
|
Additional Manufacturer Narrative
|
|
Root cause is inconclusive; no conclusion can be made as to the extent to which the implant may have caused or contributed to the patient's postoperative course.This emdr represents the bard/davol ventralight st w/ echo (device #3).An additional supplemental emdr was submitted to represent the bard/davol ventralight st w/ echo (device #1 & #2).Note, the manufacturing date (15-jun-2017) is considered to be a best estimate.Note: section a through f - the information provided by bd represents all of the known information at this time.Despite good faith efforts to obtain additional information, the complainant / reporter was unable or unwilling to provide any further patient, product, or procedural details to bd.
|
| |
|
Event or Problem Description
|
|
Per information provided: (b)(6) 2014 - patient was diagnosed with ventral hernia thereby underwent laparoscopic repair with the implant of ventralight st mesh using echo ps (device #1).Per op notes, ¿a ventralight st mesh using echo ps (device #1) was placed in the anterior abdominal wall using tackers.¿ (b)(6) 2017 - patient was diagnosed with recurrent incarcerated incisional hernia thereby underwent laparoscopic repair with the implant of two ventralight st mesh using echo ps (device #2 & #3).Per op notes, ¿there were adhesions extending from the mid to lower abdomen.There was an edge of the old mesh (device #1) that had curled over.Two ventralight st mesh using echo ps (device #2 & #3) were placed in the abdomen to cover the old mesh.¿ (b)(6) 2019 - patient was diagnosed with abdominal wall abscess with perforated cecum thereby underwent repair with removal of mesh (device #1, #2 & #3).Per op notes, ¿a moderate amount of purulent fluid was noted.Performed adhesiolysis.Identified the perforation of the cecum and was taken down.There was a retained foreign body, which appeared to be a previously placed echo mesh (device #1, #2 & #3).This was noted to be intracorporeal in the cecum and was removed in its entirety.¿.
|
| |
|
Search Alerts/Recalls
|