• Decrease font size
  • Return font size to normal
  • Increase font size
U.S. Department of Health and Human Services

MAUDE Adverse Event Report: BIOSENSE WEBSTER, INC. (IRWINDALE) 20 POLE ECO CABLE; COMPUTER, DIAGNOSTIC, PROGRAMMABLE

  • Print
  • Share
  • E-mail
-
Super Search Devices@FDA
510(k) | DeNovo | Registration & Listing | Adverse Events | Recalls | PMA | HDE | Classification | Standards
CFR Title 21 | Radiation-Emitting Products | X-Ray Assembler | Medsun Reports | CLIA | TPLC
 

BIOSENSE WEBSTER, INC. (IRWINDALE) 20 POLE ECO CABLE; COMPUTER, DIAGNOSTIC, PROGRAMMABLE Back to Search Results
Model Number M-5852-03
Device Problem Noise, Audible (3273)
Patient Problem No Known Impact Or Consequence To Patient (2692)
Event Date 01/12/2016
Event Type  malfunction  
Manufacturer Narrative
The bwi failure analysis lab received the device for evaluation.The analysis has begun but is not completed at this time.When the investigational analysis has been completed, a supplemental 3500a report will be submitted.(b)(4).
 
Event Description
It was reported that a patient underwent an atrial fibrillation procedure with a 20 pole eco cable and a noise issue occurred.When the lasso eco was connected to the carto 3 system there was noise on all of the electrograms.The catheter cable was changed which did not resolve the issue.The eco dongle cable was changed which resolved the issue and the procedure was continued.The procedure was completed with no patient consequence.Multiple attempts have been made to obtain clarification to this complaint.However, no further information has been made available.Since it is unknown if noise occurred on all the channels, including the 12 leads of body surface electrocardiogram (ecg) and all intracardiac ecgs on the carto and recording system, and it is also unknown if there was any ecg signal available for the physician to monitor the patient's heart rhythm, bwi conservatively reports this event.
 
Manufacturer Narrative
(b)(4).It was reported that a patient underwent an atrial fibrillation procedure with a 20 pole eco cable and a noise issue occurred.The returned device was visually inspected and one pin was missing on p1 connector side.Then a carto 3 test was performed with the cable and a known good catheter and no malfunctions were observed.No errors or noise were displayed.All the cables are inspected for visual damages before packaging.On line inspections are in place to prevent this type of damage/defect from leaving the facility.The device history record (dhr) was reviewed and no anomalies were found related to this complaint.In addition, the dhr review verifies that the device was manufactured in accordance with documented specification and procedures.Catheter failed during the visual inspection.However based on the available analysis finding results, the failure mode reported by the customer does not appear to be caused by any internal bwi processes; since cable pass all the functional tests.The root cause of the broken pin cannot be determined.
 
Search Alerts/Recalls

  New Search  |  Submit an Adverse Event Report

Brand Name
20 POLE ECO CABLE
Type of Device
COMPUTER, DIAGNOSTIC, PROGRAMMABLE
Manufacturer (Section D)
BIOSENSE WEBSTER, INC. (IRWINDALE)
15715 arrow highway
irwindale CA 91706
Manufacturer (Section G)
BIOSENSE WEBSTER, INC. (IRWINDALE)
15715 arrow highway
irwindale CA 91706
Manufacturer Contact
joaquin kurz
9497893837
MDR Report Key5414003
MDR Text Key38139332
Report Number2029046-2016-00005
Device Sequence Number1
Product Code DQK
Combination Product (y/n)N
PMA/PMN Number
K090017
Number of Events Reported1
Summary Report (Y/N)N
Report Source Manufacturer
Source Type company representative
Reporter Occupation Other
Type of Report Initial,Followup
Report Date 01/12/2016
1 Device was Involved in the Event
1 Patient was Involved in the Event
Date FDA Received02/05/2016
Is this an Adverse Event Report? No
Is this a Product Problem Report? Yes
Device Operator Health Professional
Device Model NumberM-5852-03
Device Catalogue NumberEM5050060
Device Lot NumberOEM_M-5852-03
Was Device Available for Evaluation? Device Returned to Manufacturer
Date Returned to Manufacturer01/28/2016
Is the Reporter a Health Professional? No
Was the Report Sent to FDA? No
Date Manufacturer Received01/12/2016
Was Device Evaluated by Manufacturer? Yes
Is the Device Single Use? No
Is This a Reprocessed and Reused Single-Use Device? No
Type of Device Usage Initial
Patient Sequence Number1
-
-