|
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 damaged stylet was confirmed and the cause appeared to be use-related.The product returned for evaluation was one stiffening stylet.The sample was received in two segments.The proximal segment of stylet measured 73.5cm.The distal segment was comprised only of outer coil wire.The weld tip was missing and was not returned for evaluation.The inner core wire exhibited bent shape memory in the vicinity of the break.Microscopic inspection of both the break site in the inner core wire and at the distal end of the distal segment revealed regular striations and regions of increased luster.Microscopic inspection of the shared complete break in the outer coil wire revealed material necking and a granular fracture surface.The regular striations and increased luster indicated that the stylet was cut with a sharp metal instrument such as scissors.The location of the damage suggested that the stylet may have been cut when the catheter was trimmed.The product ifu states ¿do not cut the stylet.¿ the shared complete break in the coil wire was typical of damage caused by tensile stress and likely occurred during attempted stylet removal.A lot history review (lhr) of rezf0594 showed no other similar product complaint(s) from this lot number.
|