| Model Number |
4010-04-09-T3 |
| Medical Device Problem Code |
Adverse Event Without Identified Device or Use Problem (2993)
|
| Health Effect - Clinical Code |
Hypersensitivity/Allergic reaction (1907)
|
| Date of Event |
09/16/2025
|
|
Type of Reportable Event
|
Serious Injury
|
|
Event or Problem Description
|
|
According to the reporter, the event occurred after the procedure and the patient had an allergic reaction to a hydromark open-coil titanium marker.The reporter did not have the product code or the lot number of the marker used.On (b)(6) 2025, about 3 hours post marker placement, the patient developed hives and felt hot.The patient went to the emergency room and was treated with epinephrine.The marker was surgically removed two days later on (b)(6) 2025.The patient's symptoms are resolving.The patient is allergic to latex, although no latex was used during the biopsy.The biopsy device being used was a hologic brevera 9g needle.This was a stereotactic guided biopsy.Complaint device: -4010-04-09-t3 -lot #f12526208d or lot# f12509102d-account does not know which lot was used.The procedure was completed with these devices.
|
| |
|
Additional Manufacturer Narrative
|
|
According to the reporter, the event occurred after the procedure and the patient had an allergic reaction to a hydromark open-coil titanium marker.The reporter did not have the product code or the lot number of the marker used.On (b)(6) 2025, about 3 hours post marker placement, the patient developed hives and felt hot.The patient went to the emergency room and was treated with epinephrine.The marker was surgically removed two days later on (b)(6) 2025.The patient's symptoms are resolving.The patient is allergic to latex, although no latex was used during the biopsy.The biopsy device being used was a hologic brevera 9g needle.This was a stereotactic guided biopsy.Complaint device: -4010-04-09-t3 -lot #f12526208d or lot# f12509102d-account does not know which lot was used.The procedure was completed with these devices.The device in question was not returned to the manufacturer for evaluation.Based on the information currently available, it is most likely that the reported adverse event was related to the patient's underlying condition.Note: d4 expiration date, h4 device manufacturer date were not entered as two possible lot numbers were provided by the customer.The device history records were reviewed for both lot numbers and no issues were found.
|
| |
|
Search Alerts/Recalls
|