|
As reported, during a transarterial chemoembolization procedure involving a (b)(6) year-old male patient with a history of hepatocellular carcinoma, a performer introducer leaked.As the device was inserted into the body through the femoral artery, the user found that the "place near the proximal end tip" of the introducer was leaking.The device was removed and another device was used to complete the procedure successfully.A section of the device did not remain inside the patient¿s body.The patient did not require any additional procedures due to this occurrence.According to the initial reporter, the patient did not experience any adverse effects due to this occurrence.
|
|
Blank fields on this form indicate the information is unknown, unavailable, or unchanged.Investigation ¿ evaluation: reviews of the complaint history, device history record, documentation, drawing, manufacturer¿s instructions, quality control procedures, specifications, and a visual inspection of the returned device were conducted during the investigation.The visual inspection of the returned package confirmed that one rcfn-5.0-18-mpis-nt sheath, wire guide, and two dilators were returned for investigation.Biomatter was noted on all of the returned devices, but no surface damage was present.The sheath was leak tested by clamping the tubing with hemostats and injecting water through the stopcock.A leak occurred at the tubing-to-cap interface, but no damage was noted.The cap was then removed, at which time a hole was noted on the sheath.Additionally, a document-based investigation evaluation was performed.A review of the device history record showed no nonconforming events which could contribute to this failure mode.It should also be noted there were no other reported complaints for this lot number.Furthermore, reviews of the manufacturer¿s instructions, drawing, specifications, and quality control procedures were conducted, and no gaps were discovered.Based on the information provided and the examination of the returned product, investigation has concluded that this event can be traced to the manufacturing of the device.We will continue our monitoring of similar complaints and have notified the appropriate personnel of this event.Per the quality engineering risk assessment, no further action is required.This report is required by the fda under 21 cfr part 803.This report is based on unconfirmed information submitted by others.Neither the submission of this report nor any statement made in it is intended to be an admission that any cook device is defective or malfunctioned; that a death or serious injury occurred; or that any cook device caused or contributed to; or is likely to cause or contribute to a death or serious injury if a malfunction occurred.
|