|
It was reported that during a laparoscopic ovarian cystectomy, a tip perforated the uterus by approximately 2 cm, although the uterine length was measured by a sonde beforehand.During the procedure, the manipulator was held by a nurse.It is highly likely that the perforation occurred while the manipulator was in an anteflexed position rather than during a pushing motion.The doctor realized the perforation after using the manipulator.Requests for additional information were made, but no further information was provided.Uml516 rumi (b)(4).
|
|
Updated: b4, d9, g3, g6, h2, h3, h4, h6, h11.Distribution history: the complaint product was manufactured at csi in august 2024.Manufacturing record review: dhr-550013680 was reviewed and no non-conformities, related to the complaint condition, were noted.Incoming inspection review: incoming inspection record review not applicable to this product.Service history record: service history not applicable for this product.Historical complaint review: a review of the 2-year complaint history did not show similar reported complaint conditions.Product receipt: the complaint product was returned on 12/9/25.Visual evaluation: visual examination of the complaint product revealed no physical damage.Functional evaluation: the important tip length dimension, 2.35 ±.05 inches, part number 53016 assembly drawing, measured 2.339 inches which is within specification.Any relevent customer or clinical information: the following clinical information was provided by coopersurgical medical.Lactation: based on available evidence, lactation is associated with an increased risk of uterine perforation during intrauterine procedures, and although direct data for uterine manipulators are lacking, it is reasonable to infer that this risk may also apply to their use in lactating patients.Earlier postpartum patients are at the highest risk, in the literature, for perforation during uterine procedures.Anteflexed: an anteflexed or retroflexed uterus can increase the risk during manipulator placement.Other potential root causes considered are technique factors: application of excessive force, inadequate visualization during manipulator adjustments, inaccuracy of uterine measurement prior to placement of the manipulator, operator experience.Root cause: the product tested to specification as the device was found to meet all visual and functional test specifications.Coopersurgical will continue to monitor this complaint condition for trends.
|