|
H11: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.The following were reviewed as part of this investigation: patient severity, trend analysis, applicable previous investigation(s), sample (if available), and applicable fmea documents.Based on a review of this information, the following was concluded: the complaint of line detachment was inconclusive because the returned sample did not appear to be the originally implicated device.The product returned for evaluation was one 22ga x 0.75¿ winged infusion set.The sample was received in its original sealed package.The device was unremarkable to gross inspection.The tubing joints appeared unremarkable.Tactile inspection of the sample was unremarkable.Microscopic inspection of the sample was unremarkable.Attachment of non-complainant luer-lock accessories to both the proximal luer adapter and y-site luer adapter were successful and unremarkable.No device deficiencies were discovered during evaluation of the returned sample; however, the sealed state of the packaging suggested that the returned device may have been a lot sample, rather than the actual device implicated in the complaint.Consequently this complaint is inconclusive at this time.A lot history review (lhr) of recv4051 showed no other similar product complaint(s) from this lot number.
|