ROCHE DIAGNOSTICS IGM ANTIBODIES TO CYTOMEGALOVIRUS (CMV IGM); ENZYME LINKED IMMUNOABSORBENT ASSAY, CYTOMEGALOVIRUS
|
Back to Search Results |
|
Catalog Number 04784618190 |
Device Problem
Low Test Results (2458)
|
Patient Problem
No Consequences Or Impact To Patient (2199)
|
Event Date 04/05/2016 |
Event Type
malfunction
|
Manufacturer Narrative
|
This event occurred in (b)(6).
|
|
Event Description
|
The customer stated that they received erroneous results for two patient samples tested for igm antibodies to cytomegalovirus (cmv igm) on an e601 analyzer.It was asked, but it is not known if the erroneous results were reported outside of the laboratory.The first sample initially resulted as 0.448 coi (non-reactive) on the e601 analyzer.The sample was repeated at a different laboratory on an abbott architect analyzer on (b)(6) 2016, resulting as 1.90 ratio (positive).The sample was also repeated on the e601 analyzer on (b)(6) 2016, resulting as 0.462 coi (non-reactive).The second sample, from a (b)(6) female, initially resulted as 0.564 coi (non-reactive) on the e601 analyzer on (b)(6) 2016.The sample was repeated at a different laboratory on an abbott architect analyzer on (b)(6) 2016, resulting as 1.10 ratio (positive).The patients were not adversely affected.The e601 analyzer serial number was asked for, but not provided.
|
|
Manufacturer Narrative
|
A specific root cause could not be determined based on the provided information.Samples from the first patient were provided for investigation.A sample from the second patient was not available for investigation.Investigation of the first patient sample was able to confirm the customer's results.The sample showed (b)(6), but was still (b)(6) the cut-off for the elecsys cmv igm assay.The sample was (b)(6) when tested with the recomline cmv igm assay.The (b)(6) of the detected antibodies suggest that the first patient may have encountered a primary infection with (b)(6) 18-20 weeks prior to the sampling on (b)(6) 2016.The previous sample from this patient measured on (b)(6) 2015 did not show (b)(6) in the performed assays, indicating that the time point of infection must have been in close proximity to the first sampling date.Apparently, at this earlier time point significant antibody titers had not formed yet.Moreover, the later sample shows an only (b)(6) igm titer suggesting that this patient developed a (b)(6) response only, which renders early detection challenging.Alternatively, the maturation of igg antibodies might occur faster than average in this particular patient and the time point of primary infection was between the two samplings.No medical device problem was found.
|
|
Search Alerts/Recalls
|
|
|