|
H11: as the lot number for the device was provided, a review of the device history records is currently being performed.The device has been returned to the manufacturer for evaluation.The investigation of the reported event is currently underway.Section a through f ¿ the information provided by bd represents all 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.
|
|
On (b)(6) 2025, a patient underwent a placement procedure of glidepath dialysis catheter via right internal jugular vein.During the procedure, it was reported that the dilator was allegedly did not have a hollow space for the guidewire to pass through.It was further reported that the dilator was stuck inside the patient.The procedure was completed by using another device.There was no reported patient injury.
|
|
H11: manufacturing review: the device history records have been reviewed, and this lot met all release criteria.Investigation summary: one 12fr dilator was returned for evaluation.Visual, microscopic visual and functional evaluations were performed.The distal tip of the dilator was noted to not have an exit port as it noted to be sealed.Guidewire was inserted into the dilator, and the guidewire did not protrude the distal end as blockage was felt.A portion of the distal end of the dilator was cut for further evaluation, and adhesive was noted within the distal portion and sealing the exit port.Manufacturing review was performed and closer view revealed a complete occlusion of the distal tip of the dilator.In the functional tests it was observed that an attempt was made to pass a guide wire through the dilator, but it did not come out of the tip.The manufacturing reviewed confirmed the "occluded dilator" and the process indicated that this defect is related to the tip forming process, the lack of verification of the passage of the guide wire is a potential cause.Therefore, the investigation is confirmed for the reported dilator does not have a hollow space issue identified coagulation of adhesive and complete blockage issues.However, the investigation is inconclusive for the reported dilator stuck inside the patient issue as the exact circumstances at the time of the reported event cannot be verified from the returned physical sample.The root cause was determined to be manufacturing related.Labelling review: as the reported event did not allege a labeling or use related issue, a labeling review is not required.D4 (unique identifier (udi)), g3, h6 (device, component, method, result, conclusion).Section a through f ¿ the information provide by bd represents all 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.
|