|
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 leaking midline catheter was confirmed through video footage, but the cause could not be determined since the physical sample was not returned for evaluation.The video is 5 seconds long and shows a midline catheter.The words ¿poly midline¿ were visible on the white hub.It appeared that the catheter had been inserted into the body.Blood residue is shown on a drape below the insertion site.A length of purple material was shown to the left of the catheter which is assumed to be the tourniquet.The location of insertion is unclear throughout the video.It was observed at around the 2 second mark that a clear fluid is escaping from the catheter at the junction between the proximal end of the white molded hub and the extension leg.The tubing proximal to the hub is not relaxed but appears taut at about a 30° angle upward from horizontal.A clamp is seen proximal to the hub which is not clamped down.No statlock is seen on the device.In conclusion, the complaint alleging a leaking midline is confirmed by video evidence, but the cause could not be determined without the physical sample.A lot history review (lhr) review is not possible; the manufacturing lot number that was provided is incorrect.
|