| Model Number |
OMSA8 |
| Medical Device Problem Codes |
Bent (1059); Entrapment of Device (1212)
|
| Health Effect - Clinical Codes |
Tissue Damage (2104); Perforation of Vessels (2135)
|
| Date of Event |
06/15/2016
|
|
Type of Reportable Event
|
Serious Injury
|
|
Additional Manufacturer Narrative
|
|
(b)(4) (b)(6).(b)(4).
|
| |
|
Event or Problem Description
|
|
According to the reporter: during a living donor kidney transplant procedure, the devices were being applied to the renal artery.The first device fired one clip okay and then the device misfired on the second clip.The second device fired two clips okay and would not release from the artery on the third clip.Had to pull the device off which caused a tear in the tissue.The surgeon was frustrated and bent the third device.The procedure was completed with a straight clip applier.
|
| |
|
Additional Manufacturer Narrative
|
|
(b)(4).
|
| |
|
Additional Manufacturer Narrative
|
|
(b)(4).Post market vigilance (pmv) led an evaluation of three right-angle multiple clip appliers opened by the account and two right-angle multiple clip appliers which were still in packaging.This evaluation was based on a technical review of all data received from the site, a pmv review of manufacturing records, a pmv review of complaint trends, engineering review of the product, and an evaluation of the returned device.The reported condition for this incident states that the instruments locked on tissue, clips did not load properly and shafts bent.Instrument one was partially applied with eighteen clips remaining in the channel.The shaft was bent.The shrink wrap was damaged at the bend and the distal end near the jaw.The jaw was damaged.The condition of this device precluded evaluation.Based on the evaluation it was determined that the bent shaft of the instrument one was caused during clinical application.Replication of the bent shaft condition may occur with intentional over flexure of the shaft during clinical application causing the shaft to bend.Visual inspections of the remaining instruments revealed no abnormalities.Instruments two, three and four were functionally tested and found to operate as expected.Instrument five was fired on test media and the handle was found to hesitate.This condition was determined to have occurred as the result of a manufacturing error.A process enhancement has been initiated to prevent this condition from recurring.A review of the device history record indicates this device lot number was released meeting all quality specifications at the time of manufacture.Should new information become available, the file will be re-opened and the investigation reassessed at that time.
|
| |
|
Search Alerts/Recalls
|