COBAS 6000 E601 MODULE
Report
- Report Number
- 1823260-2012-01115
- Event Type
- Malfunction
- Date Received
- February 28, 2012
- Date of Event
- February 1, 2012
- Report Date
- May 17, 2012
- Manufacturer
- ROCHE DIAGNOSTICS
- Product Code
- CEM
- PMA / PMN Number
- K060373
- Removal / Correction Number
- NA
- Product Problem
- Yes
- Report Source
- Manufacturer report
- Reporter Location
- CA, US
- Reporter Occupation
- HEALTH PROFESSIONAL
Narratives
A DEFINITIVE ROOT CAUSE COULD NOT BE DETERMINED. THE ISSUES IDENTIFIED PREVIOUSLY WITH THE MEASURING CELL WERE NOT THE REASON FOR THIS EVENT. CALIBRATION AND QUALITY CONTROL DATA DO NOT INDICATE A GENERAL REAGENT ISSUE. THERE WAS NO EVIDENCE FOR AN INSTRUMENT RELATED PROBLEM. THE CUSTOMER WAS NOT FOLLOWING THE TUBE MANUFACTURER'S SPECIFICATIONS FOR CENTRIFUGATION TIME. THE CUSTOMER WAS NOT USING THE RECOMMENDED RACK ADAPTORS FOR THE PRIMARY TUBES.
THE CUSTOMER RECEIVED QUESTIONABLE INTACT HUMAN CHORIONIC GONADOTROPIN + THE SS-SUBUNIT (HCGB) RESULTS ON THEIR E601 ANALYZER. THE CUSTOMER PROVIDED DATA FOR TWO PATIENTS WITH DISCREPANT RESULTS REPORTED OUTSIDE THE LABORATORY. BOTH SAMPLES WERE REPEATED AFTER THE RESULTS WERE QUESTIONED USING THE ORIGINAL E601 ANALYZER. THE FIRST PATIENT'S INITIAL HCGB RESULT WAS 0.409 MIU/ML. ON (B)(6) 2012, THE FIRST PATIENT'S REPEAT HCGB RESULT WAS 10000 MIU/ML ACCOMPANIED BY A DATA FLAG. IT WAS REPEATED AND THE RESULT WAS 193159 MIU/ML ACCOMPANIED BY A DATA FLAG. ON (B)(6) 2012, THE SECOND PATIENT'S INITIAL HCGB RESULT WAS 0.414 MIU/ML. ON (B)(6) 2012, THE SECOND PATIENT'S REPEAT HCGB RESULT WAS 10000 MIU/ML ACCOMPANIED BY A DATA FLAG. IT WAS REPEATED AND THE RESULT WAS 19611 MIU/ML ACCOMPANIED BY A DATA FLAG. THE CUSTOMER CONSIDERED THE REPEAT RESULTS TO BE CORRECT. IT IS UNKNOWN IF THERE WERE ANY ADVERSE EVENTS. THE HCGB REAGENT LOT NUMBER WAS 16250103 AND THE EXPIRATION DATE WAS 07/31/2012. ON (B)(6) 2012, THE FIELD SERVICE REPRESENTATIVE (FSR) COULD NOT DETERMINE THE CAUSE OF THE EVENT. HE RAN PERFORMANCE TESTING AND MEASURING CELL TWO FAILED. ON (B)(6) 2012, THE FSR SUSPECTED A DIRTY REAGENT PROBE WAS THE CAUSE OF THE EVENT. HE FLUSHED OUT THE REAGENT PROBE WITH SYSWASH FOLLOWED BY A FLUSH WITH DI WATER. HE RAN PERFORMANCE TESTING. THE 1ST CALIBRATION HIGH FAILED. ON (B)(6) 2012, THE FSR SUSPECTED THE PERFORMANCE TESTING FAILED BECAUSE OF A BUBBLE. HE RAN PERFORMANCE TESTING WHICH PASSED WITH NO ERRORS. HE RETURNED THE SYSTEM BACK TO THE CUSTOMER.
Devices
| Seq | Brand | Generic | Product Code | Manufacturer | Model | Lot | UDI-DI |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | COBAS 6000 E601 MODULE | IMMUNOCHEMISTRY ANALYZER | CEM | ROCHE DIAGNOSTICS | NA | NA |
Patients
| Seq | Age | Sex | Outcome | Treatment |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 |