• Decrease font size
  • Return font size to normal
  • Increase font size
U.S. Department of Health and Human Services

MAUDE Adverse Event Report: BECTON DICKINSON INFUSION THERAPY SYSTEMS INC. BD NEXIVA¿ CLOSED IV CATHETER SYSTEM; INTRAVENOUS CATHETER

  • Print
  • Share
  • E-mail
-
Super Search Devices@FDA
510(k) | DeNovo | Registration & Listing | Adverse Events | Recalls | PMA | HDE | Classification | Standards
CFR Title 21 | Radiation-Emitting Products | X-Ray Assembler | Medsun Reports | CLIA | TPLC
 

BECTON DICKINSON INFUSION THERAPY SYSTEMS INC. BD NEXIVA¿ CLOSED IV CATHETER SYSTEM; INTRAVENOUS CATHETER Back to Search Results
Catalog Number 383512
Device Problems Break (1069); Entrapment of Device (1212)
Patient Problem Foreign Body In Patient (2687)
Event Date 09/18/2017
Event Type  Injury  
Manufacturer Narrative
(b)(6).A device evaluation is anticipated, but has not yet begun.Upon completion of the investigation, a supplemental report will be filed.
 
Event Description
This complaint is mdr reportable.It was reported the bd nexiva closed iv catheter system had the ¿catheter breaking in two, it had to be surgically removed.¿.
 
Manufacturer Narrative
The initial mdr was submitted with an incorrect date received by manufacturer.The correct date received by manufacturer is 11/27/2017.
 
Manufacturer Narrative
Results: samples were received for evaluation by our quality engineer team.Upon examination, the edges of the remaining catheter tubing were observed to be smooth.Smooth edges are indicative of a sharp instrument cutting the tubing.Had the tubing been nicked, possibly during the manufacturing process, and torn due to actuation of the tubing while the device remained in the patient, the tubing would display significant jaggedness and roughness on the edges.The reported defect was not created during the manufacturing process.Had the tubing sustained the observed damaged during the manufacturing process, the unit would not have passed the 100% vision inspection for lie distance (the distance between the tip of the catheter and the bevel of the cannula) since the tubing would have completely separated from the rest of the device immediately after being cut.Furthermore, this damage occurred to the device after insertion into the patient's vasculature, otherwise the device would not have been successfully inserted without noticeable leakage.Dhr review - as no batch number was provided by the customer, a dhr review could not be performed for the returned unit.Qn database review - as no batch number was provided by the customer, a qn database review could not be performed for the returned unit.Eura review - investigation has shown that the catheter tubing was cut.The failure mode of catheter cut has been identified in (b)(4).Based on the customer's verbatim description, the effect of this failure mode is catheter fragment requiring surgical removal, which has a moderate severity of s3.Occurrence rate of this defect could not be established for the batch as no batch number was provided.However, given a remote occurrence (rarely, if ever, observed) and a moderate severity, the risk to the end user is acceptable.(b)(4) has been created to clarify the removal step and associated risks.Sample analysis - visual/microscopic examination revealed that the edges of the remaining catheter tubing were smooth.Smooth edges are indicative of a sharp instrument cutting the tubing.The customer's experience was confirmed by the returned unit.Conclusion: the smooth edges of the remaining catheter tubing indicate that the entire wall thickness of the tubing was cut with a sharp edge around the entire diameter of the tubing.Had the tubing been nicked, possibly during the manufacturing process, and torn due to actuation of the tubing while the device remained in the patient, the tubing would display significant jaggedness and roughness on the edges.The reported defect was not created during the manufacturing process.Had the tubing sustained the observed damaged during the manufacturing process, the unit would not have passed the 100% vision inspection for lie distance (the distance between the tip of the catheter and the bevel of the cannula) since the tubing would have completely separated from the rest of the device immediately after being cut.Furthermore, this damage occurred to the device after insertion into the patient's vasculature, otherwise the device would not have been successfully inserted without noticeable leakage.D16123 rev 6(c) nexiva dual port instructions for use precautions against using scissors or sharp instruments at or near the insertion site.
 
Search Alerts/Recalls

  New Search  |  Submit an Adverse Event Report

Brand Name
BD NEXIVA¿ CLOSED IV CATHETER SYSTEM
Type of Device
INTRAVENOUS CATHETER
Manufacturer (Section D)
BECTON DICKINSON INFUSION THERAPY SYSTEMS INC.
9450 south state street
sandy UT 84070
MDR Report Key7063686
MDR Text Key93096928
Report Number1710034-2017-00458
Device Sequence Number1
Product Code FOZ
UDI-Device Identifier00382903835126
UDI-Public00382903835126
Combination Product (y/n)N
PMA/PMN Number
K102520
Number of Events Reported1
Summary Report (Y/N)N
Report Source Manufacturer
Source Type company representative,foreig
Type of Report Initial,Followup,Followup
Report Date 01/30/2018
1 Device was Involved in the Event
1 Patient was Involved in the Event
Date FDA Received11/28/2017
Is this an Adverse Event Report? Yes
Is this a Product Problem Report? Yes
Device Operator Other
Device Catalogue Number383512
Device Lot NumberUNKNOWN
Date Manufacturer Received11/27/2017
Is This a Reprocessed and Reused Single-Use Device? No
Patient Sequence Number1
Patient Outcome(s) Required Intervention;
-
-