|
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 rebt1982 showed no other similar product complaint(s) from this lot number.
|
|
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 was confirmed and the cause was determined to be use related.One 5fr d/l poly radpicc was returned for investigation.The bifurcation was yellow in color, which confirms that the sample was used.Tape residue was observed on the extension legs.A 2mm tear was observed at the proximal end of the wing on the red lumen side of the catheter.A microscopic examination revealed that the adjoining surfaces between the wing and bifurcation were rough and granular, which is indicative of a tear.A functional test revealed that the lumens were patent to infusion, and a leak was observed at the tear.It appeared that the catheter was manipulated during use, which caused the material to tear.The discoloration in the material may have been a contributing factor.Due to the evidence of use, it appeared that the tear developed over time.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 rebt1982 showed no other similar product complaint(s) from this lot number.
|