|
H11: 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.The complaint of a damaged microintroducer sheath was confirmed but the exact cause remains unknown.The product returned for evaluation was one 4.5fr microez microintroducer.The returned product sample was evaluated and the tip of sheath was found to be deformed.The following observations were noted during the sample evaluation: no usage residue was seen on the sample, suggesting that the device had been damaged prior to insertion.A longitudinally aligned split was present at the sheath edge.The split had straight and well-defined fracture edges.Buckling and flaring of the sheath edge was present around the split peel-apart sheath deformation was observed that appeared consistent with insertion against resistance; however, the lack of use residues indicated that the device had likely not been inserted into a patient.Buckling of the sheath edge resulting in a crumpled appearance, as seen on this device, is typically a result of the sheath edge catching and pressing against an object.Given that the reported event likely happened prior to insertion, possible contributing factors include mishandling of the device by the user or mishandling during the manufacturing process.The features observed during investigation did not provide enough evidence to conclusively determine when and where the damage occurred or if any other additional factors also contributed to the reported event.Consequently, this complaint is confirmed as ¿cause unknown¿ at this time.This complaint will be recorded for future trending and monitoring purposes.
|