|
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 device has not been returned to the manufacturer, at this time, for evaluation.A lot history review (lhr) of rebt1329 showed one other similar product complaint(s) from this lot number.The complaints for this lot number (rebt1329) have been reported from the same facility.Device not returned yet.
|
|
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 leak in the per-q-cath picc was confirmed, but how or when the catheter was damaged cannot be verified.One 2 fr per-q-cath picc was returned for evaluation.The picc was received without the stylet in the lumen, which indicates that the catheter was placed.The catheter was received in two segments.The proximal segment extended 5.3cm from the distal end of the strain relief oversleeve.The distal catheter segment was 11.6cm in length.A leak was identified in the 2fr tubing between the 1cm and 2cm depth marks.The leak site was microscopically examined and a split was found on the external surface of the tubing.The catheter was cut longitudinally to examine the leak site from within the catheter, which revealed similar damage on the internal surface of the tubing.It is possible that the catheter cut by the stylet by either compressing the tubing over the stylet.The product ifu states, ¿avoid accidental device contact with sharp instruments and mechanical damage to the catheter material.¿ manipulation of the stylet within the lumen can also damage the catheter is the stylet is not wetted prior to repositioning.The ifu indicates to never use force to remove stylet.Resistance can damage the catheter.Since the catheter had been trimmed to length, and the stylet removed, the damage may have occurred during use.A review of the dhr showed that the product was 100% leak tested and no problems were identified.No further action is required because the reported event could not be related to a deficiency in product manufacture or deficiency while under correct product use.A lot history review (lhr) of rebt1329 showed one other similar product complaint(s) from this lot number.The complaints for this lot number (rebt1329) have been reported from the same facility.
|