| Model Number |
42355 |
| Medical Device Problem Codes |
Mechanics Altered (2984); Insufficient Device Problem Information (3190)
|
| Health Effect - Clinical Code |
Vomiting (2144)
|
| Date of Event |
09/24/2018
|
|
Type of Reportable Event
|
Serious Injury
|
|
Additional Manufacturer Narrative
|
|
If information is provided in the future, a supplemental report will be issued.
|
| |
|
Event or Problem Description
|
|
It was reported the patient exhibited vomiting, and the valve needed to be readjusted.The patient's status at the time of the report was alive-no injury.Additional information received reported the patient had a fall 3 days before the re-adjustment occurred from 1 meter height.It was stated the device was re-adjusted from 1.5 where it was found to the initial 2.0.The patient was doing great without any symptoms or any other signs of adjustment issues.
|
| |
|
Additional Manufacturer Narrative
|
|
If information is provided in the future, a supplemental report will be issued.
|
| |
|
Event or Problem Description
|
|
Additional information received reported the valve was explanted on (b)(6) 2018.
|
| |
|
Additional Manufacturer Narrative
|
|
The returned valve was patent.It met the requirements for reflux, leak testing, and valve flux test, pressure-flow, and preimplantation.The pl settings on the valve were able to be adjusted without any interference by lab personnel.Therefore, the complaint could not be duplicated.There was proteinaceous debris noted within the interior of the valve.The instructions for use (ifu) that accompany the device cautions that ¿introduction of contaminant could result in improper performance of the shunt system.Particulate matter that enters the shunt system may result in shunt occlusion.¿ there was damage noted on the inlet connector.It is unknown how or when the damaged occurred.The ifu that accompanies the product cautions that, ¿improper use of instruments in the handling or implantation of shunt products may result in the cutting, slitting or crushing of components¿.¿.All valves are 100% tested at the time of manufacture.If information is provided in the future, a supplemental report will be issued.
|
| |
|
Additional Manufacturer Narrative
|
|
If information is provided in the future, a supplemental report will be issued.
|
| |
|
Event or Problem Description
|
|
Additional information confirmed that the valve was not de-regulated and then adjusted.The valve was on initial adjustment without any de-regulation.The surgeon decided to adjust the valve from the initial setting of 1.5 to 2.0 according to his therapy.
|
| |
|
Additional Manufacturer Narrative
|
|
If information is provided in the future, a supplemental report will be issued.
|
| |
|
Additional Manufacturer Narrative
|
|
If information is provided in the future, a supplemental report will be issued.
|
| |
|
Event or Problem Description
|
|
Information received stated that the patient born was suffering from craniosynostosis.
|
| |
|
Additional Manufacturer Narrative
|
|
If information is provided in the future, a supplemental report will be issued.
|
| |
|
Event or Problem Description
|
|
Information received clarified that the patient was admitted due to vomiting during the post-op period.The patient had a ct where the valve was indeed at 1.5, which matched the original adjustment of the valve.The surgeon resolved the symptoms by adjusting the valve to 2.0.On (b)(6), the patient was re-admitted urgently due to vomiting, and the valve was found de-regulated at 0.5 without exposure to mri.The valve was re-adjusted to 2.0, and the patient also had a ct.It was noted the patient had fallen 3 days before the "de-regulation" event from a height of 80-90cm.
|
| |
|
Search Alerts/Recalls
|