Skip to content

Fibra / Fibra® CLAMP INSERTS G-6155Recalls & reported problems

Applied Medical Resources Corporation · SURGICAL CLAMP INSERTS · Class 2

Data updated Oct 18, 2026 from official FDA records · Editorial policy

Adverse event reports
2
Deaths reported
0
Injuries reported
0
Recalls naming it
0

Summary

The FDA's MAUDE database contains 2 adverse event reports that list this exact device (DI 00607915111274), received between Nov 29, 2017 and Aug 7, 2025 — classified as 2 malfunctions.

The most frequently reported specific device problem is “Detachment Of Device Component” (1 report).

Reports come from manufacturers, hospitals and patients and are not verified by the FDA. A report does not prove the device caused the event, and counts can't be used to compare devices or estimate failure rates. What reports can and can't tell you · How this data works · Data updated Oct 18, 2026.

Reports received per month

Nov 2023: 0 reportsDec 2023: 0 reportsJan 2024: 0 reportsFeb 2024: 0 reportsMar 2024: 0 reportsApr 2024: 0 reportsMay 2024: 0 reportsJun 2024: 0 reportsJul 2024: 0 reportsAug 2024: 0 reportsSep 2024: 0 reportsOct 2024: 0 reportsNov 2024: 0 reportsDec 2024: 0 reportsJan 2025: 0 reportsFeb 2025: 0 reportsMar 2025: 0 reportsApr 2025: 0 reportsMay 2025: 0 reportsJun 2025: 0 reportsJul 2025: 0 reportsAug 2025: 1 reportsSep 2025: 0 reportsOct 2025: 0 reportsNov 2025: 0 reportsDec 2025: 0 reportsJan 2026: 0 reportsFeb 2026: 0 reportsMar 2026: 0 reportsApr 2026: 0 reportsMay 2026: 0 reportsJun 2026: 0 reportsJul 2026: 0 reportsAug 2026: 0 reportsSep 2026: 0 reportsOct 2026: 0 reports2024202520261
Last 36 months. The most recent month may be incomplete.

Most reported problems

Device problems

  • Detachment Of Device Component1
  • Unintended Ejection1

Patient problems

  • No Clinical Signs, Symptoms or Conditions1
  • No Consequences Or Impact To Patient1

Recent adverse event reports

The 2 most recent of 2 reports, in the reporter's own words as published by the FDA.

  • MalfunctionAug 7, 2025Unintended Ejection; Unintended Ejection

    PROCEDURE PERFORMED: CARDIAC SURGERY. EVENT DESCRIPTION: [DISTRIBUTOR NAME] [HOSPITAL NAME]: MODEL: G6155 LOT: 1422015. ON (B)(6) 2025 [PROCEDURE: CARDIAC SURGERY]. IT WAS REPORTED THAT THE INSERT IN QUESTION COULD NOT BE PROPERLY ATTACHED TO THE CLAMP. AT THE BEGINNING OF THE PROCEDURE, A NURSE SET UP THE INSERT TO A CLAMP, BUT IT APPEARED THAT THE INSERT COULD NOT BE PROPERLY SECURED. AS A RESULT, THE SURGEON NOTICED A LOSS OF OCCLUSION OR SENSED SOMETHING WAS WRONG DURING USE. AN ATTEMPT WAS MADE TO REATTACH THE INSERT TO THE CLAMP, BUT IT WAS UNSUCCESSFUL AND THE INSERT WAS REPLACED WITH A NEW ONE. THE PROCEDURE WAS SUCCESSFULLY COMPLETED USING THE NEW INSERT. THE PRODUCT IN QUESTION WILL BE RETURNED TO YOU FOR THE INVESTIGATION. PLEASE INVESTIGATE THE POSSIBLE ROOT CAUSE. THE HOSPITAL HAS REQUESTED THE INVESTIGATION REPORT. THERE WAS NO CLINICAL IMPACT TO THE PATIENT. PATIENT STATUS NO PATIENT INJURY INDICATED INTERVENTION: THE INSERT WAS REPLACED. THE PROCEDURE WAS SUCCESSFULLY COMPLETED USING THE NEW INSERT.

    Patient problems: No Clinical Signs, Symptoms or Conditions

    MAUDE report 22745393 ↗
  • MalfunctionNov 29, 2017Detachment Of Device Component; Detachment Of Device Component

    PROCEDURE PERFORMED: "UNKNOWN" INCIDENT DESCRIPTION: A MEDICAL STAFF TRIED TO ATTACH THE INSERT TO A CLAMP. THEN THE MEDICAL STAFF FOUND THAT THE PART OF FIBRA WAS PEELED OFF FROM THE RUBBER BASE. ANOTHER INSERT WAS USED FOR THE PROCEDURE AND THE PROCEDURE WAS COMPLETED WITH NO PROBLEM. IT DIDN'T AFFECT THE PATIENT." TYPE OF INTERVENTION: "ANOTHER INSERT WAS USED FOR THE PROCEDURE AND THE PROCEDURE WAS COMPLETED WITH NO PROBLEM." PATIENT STATUS: "IT DIDN'T AFFECT THE PATIENT."

    Patient problems: No Consequences Or Impact To Patient

    MAUDE report 7068013 ↗

Other Clamp, Vascular devices

All Clamp, Vascular devices →

Sources and updates

How reports and recalls are matched · Editorial policy · Report an error on this page