| Catalog Number |
5954610 |
| Medical Device Problem Codes |
Defective Device (2588); Patient-Device Incompatibility (2682); Insufficient Device Problem Information (3190)
|
| Health Effect - Clinical Codes |
Adhesion(s) (1695); Hernia (2240); Injury (2348)
|
| Date of Event |
04/11/2016
|
|
Type of Reportable Event
|
Serious Injury
|
|
Additional Manufacturer Narrative
|
|
At this time no conclusions can be made.The patient's attorney alleges surgical intervention; however, no details have been provided.No lot number has been provided; therefore a review of the manufacturing records is not possible.Should additional information be provided a supplemental emdr will be submitted.Not returned.
|
| |
|
Event or Problem Description
|
|
Attorney alleges that on (b)(6) 2014, the patient underwent surgery for implant of an unspecified bard/davol ventralight st and an unspecified bard/davol phasix.It is alleged that the patient had subsequent surgical intervention due to the hernia mesh device.As reported, the patient is only making a claim for an adverse patient outcome against the ventralight st.As reported, the attorney alleges product is defective and that the patient experienced emotional distress.
|
| |
|
Additional Manufacturer Narrative
|
|
At this time no conclusions can be made.The patient's attorney alleges surgical intervention; however, no details have been provided.No lot number has been provided; therefore a review of the manufacturing records is not possible.Addendum: this supplemental emdr is submitted to document additional information provided.Root cause is inconclusive, no conclusion can be made as to the extent to which the implant may have caused or contributed to the patient's postoperative course.Note, the manufacturing date (15-aug-2013) is considered to be a best estimate.Note: section a through f - the information provided by bd 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 bd.
|
| |
|
Event or Problem Description
|
|
Attorney alleges that on (b)(6) 2014, the patient underwent surgery for implant of an unspecified bard/davol ventralight st and an unspecified bard/davol phasix.It is alleged that the patient had subsequent surgical intervention due to the hernia mesh device.As reported, the patient is only making a claim for an adverse patient outcome against the ventralight st.As reported, the attorney alleges product is defective and that the patient experienced emotional distress.Addendum per additional information provided: (b)(6) 2014- patient was diagnosed with ventral hernia thereby underwent repair with implant of ventralight st (device 1).(note: there is no operative notes provided for this procedure).(b)(6) 2016- patient was diagnosed with recurrent incisional hernia, thereby underwent open repair with implant of phasix mesh (device 2) and explant of ventralight st (device 1).Per op notes, ¿the old scar in the upper midline of the abdominal region was excised, and a large hernia beneath the ventralight st mesh (device 1) was identified.The ventralight st mesh was removed.The hernia sac and associated adhesions were dissected.A 15*20 cm phasix mesh (device 2) was then placed and sutured¿.
|
| |
|
Search Alerts/Recalls
|