|
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, complaint history review, applicable previous investigation(s), sample evaluation, applicable fmea documents, and labeling.Based on a review of this information, the following was concluded: the complaint of a crack in the extension tubing was confirmed and the cause was determined to be use related.The product returned for evaluation was a 22ga x 3/4¿ bard winged infusion set.The sample contained usage residue throughout and a crack in the extension tubing was seen at the proximal edge of the y-site connector of the side-tail extension.Microscopic examination of the extension tubing tear revealed that the tear occurred through the adhesive fillet.The fracture surfaces were rough, granular, topographically complex, and contained linear beach marks aligned with the circumference.Due to the evidence of use, it was determined that the tear developed over time.It is possible that tensile and/or torsional stresses caused the tear to develop during use.This can occur with patient movement, manipulation of the luer adaptor, or inadvertent pulling on the extension set.A lot history review (lhr) review is not possible, as no manufacturing lot number has been provided by the complainant.
|