|
It was reported that the inflation port of the endotracheal tube (ett) did not seem to be holding pressure, and they elected to extubate the patient.Multiple attempts were made to reintubate the patient using orogastric tube (ogt)/nasogastric tube (ngt) without success; the patient reportedly had a lot of secretions and blood in the oropharynx.Once the patient was successfully reintubated the ventilator alarm stopped and the carbon dioxide (co2) trace was fine.No additional information, concerning patient outcome, was provided.
|
|
The product involved in the report has not been returned.A review of the device history record is in-progress.All information reasonably known as of 29 july 2026 has been included in the health authority report.Should additional
information be obtained a follow-up health authority report will be provided.The information provided by airlife.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 airlife.Airlife has no independent knowledge of the event reported but is relaying the information that was provided by the user facility
where the incident occurred.This product incident is documented in the airlife complaint database and is identified as complaint
(b)(4).This information is submitted pursuant to 21cfr803, in compliance with the medical device reporting requirement and should not
be considered to be an admission that a airlife product is defective or causes serious injury
risk assessment
the ultimate risk is low, as that is the highest risk of the patient/caregiver and regulatory/compliance considerations:
(1) patient/ caregiver
performed risk assessment with rma-20024b, rev 3; the complaint most closely aligns with risk id r25 with a potential cause of hazard being " 1.Check valve leak 2.Cuff having pin hole 3.Damaged tubing 4.Leaky bonds".Severity = 6,
likelihood of occurrence = 2,
calculated occurrence = 0.0012%
per ref-20001-c1 rev 2, these levels indicate low risk.(2) regulatory/ compliance
reviewed ref-20001-c1 rev 2, and there is low regulatory/ compliance risk.(3) brand recognition and customer impact
reviewed ref-20001-c1 rev 2, and there is low brand recognition/customer impact.Device history record (dhr) review
based on the device history record (dhr) review there were no abnormal processing issues noted.All products/packaging were produced per the approved manufacturing procedures, specifications, and inspections.Complaint history review
the complaint history was reviewed in grand avenue from reported dates 06/29/2024 through 06/29/2026, for part number i-pfhv-80 and failure mode a050402 - gas/air leak.There were 1 other complaints reported for the same issue and part number under during the same timeframe; (b)(4).Sales = (b)(4) ea
calculated occurrence (p1) =(2 complaint(s) / (b)(4) ea sold) x 100 = 0.0012%
occurrence ranking = low (3).
|