|
Exemption letter e2013012 alma ltd.(manufacturer) is submitting the report on behalf of alma, inc.(importer).Section h3: alma inc.(importer) has made multiple attempts to request device back for inspection, however, no response has been received.Based on the information provided by the facility, alma ltd.Clinical determined that lack of skin test prior to the treatment and treatment area being left unprotected potentially made it prone to pulsed light energy absorption.This may explain the untoward skin reaction i.E.Burn.Alma inc.Performed a follow up to inquire about the patient's condition.As per the facility, the area has healed completely, but the tattoo in that spot is ruined.Alma ltd.Clinical evaluated the follow-up photograph but at this time alma cannot fully determine if the injury has resolved completely and therefore, submitting the report to the fda in good faith efforts.
|
|
The suspected device was used on the patient's left shoulder blade for hair removal.As per the facility, the area was not covered with anything and after treatment, the skin around the tattoo became red and inflamed almost like a burn.The patient complained that it was painful.After few hours, the redness and tenderness disappeared.Few days later, facility noticed scabs on the tattoo and that the skin on pigment was peeling.According to the facility notes, this injury was diagnosed as a burn.
|