ANALYTICAL D MODULE
Report
- Report Number
- 1823260-2012-05336
- Event Type
- Malfunction
- Date Received
- October 23, 2012
- Date of Event
- September 26, 2012
- Report Date
- December 6, 2012
- Manufacturer
- ROCHE DIAGNOSTICS
- Product Code
- CFR
- PMA / PMN Number
- K953239
- Removal / Correction Number
- NA
- Product Problem
- Yes
- Report Source
- Manufacturer report
- Reporter Location
- CA, US
- Reporter Occupation
- HEALTH PROFESSIONAL
Narratives
A ROOT CAUSE COULD NOT BE DETERMINED DUE TO THE LACK OF INFORMATION PROVIDED. THERE WAS NO QUALITY CONTROL DATA PROVIDED TO DETERMINE THE INSTRUMENT CONDITION WHEN THE INCORRECT RESULT OCCURRED. ACCORDING TO THE FIELD SERVICE REPRESENTATIVE, THE INSTRUMENT WAS OPERATING WITHOUT ANY PROBLEMS.
IT WAS UNKNOWN IF THE INITIAL REPORTER SENT REPORT TO THE FDA.
THE CUSTOMER ALLEGED THEY RECEIVED QUESTIONABLE GLUCO-QUANT GLUCOSE/HK (GLUC) RESULTS ON THEIR D-MODULE. THE CUSTOMER STATED THEY HAD THREE PATIENT SAMPLES THAT HAD TO BE CORRECTED, BUT WAS NOT ABLE TO PROVIDE FURTHER DETAILS. ALL TESTING WAS PERFORMED ON THE SAME D-MODULE. THE FIRST PATIENT'S INITIAL GLUC RESULT WAS 447 MG/DL. THE INITIAL RESULT WAS QUESTIONED BY THE DOCTOR. THE REPEAT RESULT WAS 90 MG/DL. THE SECOND PATIENT'S INITIAL GLUC RESULT WAS 637 MG/DL ACCOMPANIED BY A DATA FLAG. THE CUSTOMER STATED THE SAMPLE WAS AUTOMATICALLY REPEATED AND THE RESULT WAS 134 MG/DL. THE REPEAT RESULT WAS REPORTED OUTSIDE THE LABORATORY; HOWEVER, IT IS UNCLEAR IF THE INITIAL RESULT WAS REPORTED OUTSIDE THE LABORATORY. CLARIFICATION HAS BEEN REQUESTED. ON (B)(6) 2012, THE THIRD PATIENT'S INITIAL GLUC RESULT WAS 637 MG/DL ACCOMPANIED BY A DATA FLAG. THE REPEAT RESULT WAS 134 MG/DL ACCOMPANIED BY A DATA FLAG. IT IS UNKNOWN IF THE PATIENTS WERE ADVERSELY AFFECTED BY THE EVENT. THE GLUC R1 REAGENT LOT NUMBER WAS 66343501 AND THE EXPIRATION DATE WAS 12/31/2013. THE GLUC R2 REAGENT LOT NUMBER WAS 66699501 AND THE EXPIRATION DATE WAS 01/31/2014. THE FIELD SERVICE REPRESENTATIVE COULD NOT DETERMINE THE CAUSE OF THIS EVENT. HE PERFORMED AN AIR PURGE, REAGENT PRIME, MECHANICAL CHECK, AND THEN RAN A PRECISION TEST ON GLUC USING POOLED SAMPLE. THE MECHANICAL CHECK HAD NO ERRORS. THE R1 AND R2 DISPENSE ON THE GLUC LOOKED GOOD AND WERE GETTING RINSED PROPERLY IN THE WASH STATION. THE GLUC PRECISION TEST LOOKED GOOD. THE PHOTOMETER WAS READING IN SPECIFICATIONS.
Devices
| Seq | Brand | Generic | Product Code | Manufacturer | Model | Lot | UDI-DI |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | ANALYTICAL D MODULE | CLINICAL CHEMISTRY ANALYZER | CFR | ROCHE DIAGNOSTICS | NA | NA |
Patients
| Seq | Age | Sex | Outcome | Treatment |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 |