|
The information provided by bard 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 bard.The following were reviewed as part of this investigation: patient severity, trend analysis, applicable previous investigation(s), sample (if available), applicable fmea documents, labeling, and applicable manufacture records.Based on a review of this information, the following was concluded: the complaint of a broken guidewire was confirmed and the cause appeared to be use-related.The product returned for evaluation was one nitinol guidewire.Usage residues were observed throughout the distal end of the sample.The inner core wire was broken.The outer coil wire was elongated and broken.The weld tip was completely detached and was not returned for evaluation.Attempt to insert a non-damaged region the sample through a similar non-complainant needle were successful and unremarkable.Microscopic inspection of the breaks in the inner core wire and outer coil wire revealed material necking in the vicinities of the breaks.The break edges exhibited dully granular surfaces.The break surfaces also exhibited small regions of increased luster.The material necking and granular break surface were typical of damage caused by tensile stress.The regions of increased luster were typical of contact with a hard object such as the introducer needle bevel.It appeared that an attempt was made to withdraw the wire against the needle bevel.The wire became stuck and subsequent pulling caused the observed breaks in the wire.The product ifu states ¿if the guidewire must be withdrawn while the needle is inserted, remove both the needle and wire as a unit to prevent the needle from damaging or shearing the guidewire.¿ a lot history review (lhr) of 15hb3802 showed no other similar product complaint(s) from this lot number.
|