|
|
| Catalog Number |
0010101 |
| Medical Device Problem Code |
Patient-Device Incompatibility (2682)
|
| Health Effect - Clinical Code |
Hernia (2240)
|
| Date of Event |
12/15/2016
|
|
Type of Reportable Event
|
Serious Injury
|
|
Event or Problem Description
|
|
Per information provided: on (b)(6) 2009 ¿ patient was diagnosed with incisional hernia and bilateral inguinal hernias thereby underwent open repair with implant of two kugel hernia patch (device 1 and 2).Per operative notes, ¿an incisional hernia from the appendectomy site was reduced and closed primarily with sutures.In the left groin, the large direct defect was noted at internal ring and dissected.A kugel hernia patch (device 1) was placed and secured it with sutures.In the right groin, similarly a large defect was reduced and another kugel hernia patch (device 2) was placed and secured with sutures.¿ on (b)(6) 2014 ¿ patient was diagnosed with recurrent left inguinal hernia thereby underwent open repair with implant of perfix plug (device 3).Per operative notes, ¿in the left groin, the tissues were densely adherent to surrounding tissues.The mesh (device 1) was seen free entirely from inguinal ligament where the direct defect recurred.The hernia was dissected free and adhesions were lysed.The medium perfix plug (device 3) was placed over the hernia and previously placed mesh (device 1) was sutured to inguinal ligament and irrigated with sutures.¿ on (b)(6) 2016 - patient was diagnosed with recurrent right inguinal hernia thereby underwent open repair with implant of bard flat mesh (device 4).Per operative notes, ¿ in the right groin, a moderately large lateral direct inguinal hernia was noted.The sac was dissected out circumferentially and floor was secured with sutures.A bard flat mesh (device 4) was placed over the inguinal floor and secured with sutures.¿ (note: the previously placed right inguinal mesh (device 2) was not seen during this procedure).
|
| |
|
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.Note, the manufacturing date (15-sep-2008) is considered to be a best estimate.This mdr represents the kugel patch (device 2).An additional supplemental emdr was submitted to represent the bard/davol kugel patch (device 1).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.
|
| |
|
Search Alerts/Recalls
|
|
|