|
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, frequency 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 introducer was confirmed, and the damage appeared to be related to use of the device.The distal tip of the vessel dilator exhibited plastic deformation instead of the standard circular orifice with rounded tip.This type of deformation to the vessel dilator material is consistent with damage caused from abrasion as the introducer is advanced over a guidewire.A portion of the edge along the distal tip of the sheath also exhibited compression damage, which can happen if the edge of the sheath inadvertently catches on the surrounding tissue or vessel during insertion.The increased angle between the introducer and the guidewire can be a factor in the damage.The undamaged section along the distal sheath edge revealed what appeared to be a smooth and proper transition.One of the precautions in the ifu states, ¿do not withdraw dilator from microintroducer sheath until sheath is within vessel to minimize the risk of damage to sheath tip.¿ the ifu also states, ¿introduce the microintroducer assembly over the guidewire.Using a twisting motion, advance the assembly into the vessel.If necessary, a small incision may be made adjacent to the guidewire to facilitate insertion of the sheath and dilator.¿ a lot history review (lhr) of rebp0363 showed no other similar product complaint(s) from this lot number.
|