ARROW CONTINUOUS NERVE BLOCK KIT
Report
- Report Number
- 1036844-2015-00278
- Event Type
- Malfunction
- Date Received
- July 6, 2015
- Date of Event
- June 18, 2015
- Report Date
- June 19, 2015
- Manufacturer
- ARROW INTERNATIONAL INC.
- Product Code
- OGJ
- Product Problem
- Yes
- Report Source
- Manufacturer report
- Reporter Location
- MO, US
- Reporter Occupation
- OTHER
Narratives
(B)(4). IT IS UNKNOWN IF THE DEVICE SAMPLE IS AVAILABLE FOR EVALUATION.
(B)(4). THE CUSTOMER RETURNED ONE CATHETER FRAGMENT FOR INVESTIGATION. A VISUAL EXAM WAS PERFORMED AND THE CATHETER PIECE APPEARS TO BE THE BULLETED TIP FROM THE DISTAL END OF A STIMUCATH. NO EXTRUSION WAS RECEIVED. THE COILS WERE SEVERELY STRETCHED AND THE SAFETY RIBBON COULD BE SEEN IN BETWEEN THE COILS. THE SAFETY RIBBON APPEARS TO HAVE BEEN CUT AT THE POINT OF SEPARATION AS THERE WERE SIGNS OF NECKING IN THE METAL THAT IS TYPICAL OF METAL THAT HAS BEEN CUT. THE REPORTED COMPLAINT OF A DIFFICULT REMOVAL RESULTING IN CATHETER SEPARATION WAS CONFIRMED BASED ON THE RETURNED SAMPLE. THE CUSTOMER RETURNED A CATHETER FRAGMENT ONLY WHICH CONFIRMED THAT THE CATHETER HAD BEEN CUT. A DHR REVIEW WAS PERFORMED ON THE CATHETER WITH NO EVIDENCE TO SUGGEST A MANUFACTURING RELATED CAUSE. THE CUSTOMER REPORTED THAT THE CATHETER WAS REMOVED BY A FRIEND OF THE PATIENT AND ALSO THAT THE CATHETER WAS CUT. BOTH OF THESE DETAILS INDICATE THAT THE CATHETER WAS USED AGAINST THE WARNINGS PROVIDED IN THE IFU. THEREFORE, IT WAS DETERMINED THAT USER ERROR CAUSED OR CONTRIBUTED TO THIS EVENT.
(B)(4). NO LOT NUMBER WAS PROVIDED BY THE CUSTOMER; THEREFORE, A DEVICE HISTORY RECORD (DHR) REVIEW WAS PERFORMED ON A LOT NUMBER BASED ON CUSTOMER SALES HISTORY. COMPLAINT VERIFICATION TESTING COULD NOT BE PERFORMED AS NO SAMPLE WAS RETURNED FOR ANALYSIS. A DHR REVIEW WAS PERFORMED ON THE CATHETER WITH NO EVIDENCE TO SUGGEST A MANUFACTURING RELATED CAUSE. THE CUSTOMER REPORTED THAT THE CATHETER WAS REMOVED BY A FRIEND OF THE PATIENT AND ALSO THAT THE CATHETER WAS CUT. BOTH OF THESE DETAILS INDICATE THAT THE CATHETER WAS USED AGAINST THE WARNINGS PROVIDED IN THE IFU. THEREFORE, IT WAS DETERMINED THAT USER ERROR CAUSED OR CONTRIBUTED TO THIS EVENT.
THE PATIENT HAD AN INTERSCALENE CATHETER PLACED IN THE NECK BY AN ANESTHESIOLOGIST PRIOR TO SHOULDER SURGERY ON (B)(6) /2015. THE PATIENT WAS INSTRUCTED ON HOW TO REMOVE THE CATHETER WHICH WAS TO BE DONE ON (B)(6) 2015. THE PATIENT'S FRIEND ATTEMPTED TO REMOVE THE CATHETER AND MET WITH RESISTANCE AND SO CUT THE CATHETER. THE PATIENT EXPERIENCED DISCOMFORT. THE PATIENT IS TO BE SEEN BY AN ENT FOR INTERVENTION IN REMOVAL OF THE REMAINING CATHETER.
THE PATIENT HAD AN INTERSCALENE CATHETER PLACED IN THE NECK BY AN ANESTHESIOLOGIST PRIOR TO SHOULDER SURGERY ON (B)(6) 2015. THE PATIENT WAS INSTRUCTED ON HOW TO REMOVE THE CATHETER WHICH WAS TO BE DONE ON (B)(6) 2015. THE PATIENT'S FRIEND ATTEMPTED TO REMOVE THE CATHETER AND MET WITH RESISTANCE AND SO CUT THE CATHETER. THE PATIENT EXPERIENCED DISCOMFORT. THE PATIENT IS TO BE SEEN BY AN ENT FOR INTERVENTION IN REMOVAL OF THE REMAINING CATHETER.
THE PATIENT HAD AN INTERSCALENE CATHETER PLACED IN THE NECK BY AN ANESTHESIOLOGIST PRIOR TO SHOULDER SURGERY ON (B)(6) 2015. THE PATIENT WAS INSTRUCTED ON HOW TO REMOVE THE CATHETER WHICH WAS TO BE DONE ON (B)(6) 2015. THE PATIENT'S FRIEND ATTEMPTED TO REMOVE THE CATHETER AND MET WITH RESISTANCE AND SO CUT THE CATHETER. THE PATIENT EXPERIENCED DISCOMFORT. THE PATIENT IS TO BE SEEN BY AN ENT FOR INTERVENTION IN REMOVAL OF THE REMAINING CATHETER.
Devices
| Seq | Brand | Generic | Product Code | Manufacturer | Model | Lot | UDI-DI |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 436466 | ARROW CONTINUOUS NERVE BLOCK KIT | NERVE BLOCK KIT | OGJ | ARROW INTERNATIONAL INC. |
Patients
| Seq | Age | Sex | Outcome | Treatment |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Required Intervention |