Olympus A02908ARecalls & reported problems
OLYMPUS Winter & Ibe GmbH · Attachment, for CYF, 3-way stopcock, quick lock · Class 2
Data updated Oct 16, 2026 from official FDA records · Editorial policy
- Adverse event reports
- 5
- Deaths reported
- 0
- Injuries reported
- 5
- Recalls naming it
- 0
Summary
The FDA's MAUDE database contains 5 adverse event reports that list this exact device (DI 04042761019507), received between Sep 27, 2024 and Sep 27, 2024 — classified as 5 injuries.
The most frequently reported specific device problem is “Contamination” (5 reports).
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 16, 2026.
Reports received per month
Most reported problems
Device problems
- Contamination5
- Device Reprocessing Problem5
- Labelling, Instructions for Use or Training Problem5
Patient problems
- Sepsis5
- Urinary Tract Infection5
Recent adverse event reports
The 5 most recent of 5 reports, in the reporter's own words as published by the FDA.
InjurySep 27, 2024Device Reprocessing Problem; Contamination; Labelling, Instructions for Use or Training Problem; Device Reprocessing Problem; Contamination; Labelling, Instructions for Use or Training Problem
IT WAS REPORTED THE HEALTH CARE PROVIDER (HCP) NOTICED AN INCREASED NUMBER OF URINARY TRACT INFECTIONS IN PATIENTS AFTER CYSTOSCOPY PROCEDURES WHEN THE FACILITY STARTED USING THE 3-WAY STOPCOCK ON FLEXIBLE CYSTOSCOPES. THERE WERE FOUR PATIENTS AFFECTED AND THE PATIENTS WERE ADMITTED TO THE HOSPITAL THE WEEK AFTER THE PROCEDURE. THEY WERE DIAGNOSED WITH URINARY TRACT INFECTION AND SEPSIS. AT FIRST THE STOPCOCK DEVICES WERE REPROCESSED USING A THERMAL DISINFECTOR AND NOW THE FACILITY REPROCESSES THE DEVICE IN THE BASKET OF AN ETD4 REPROCESSOR. THE CUSTOMER INDICATED THEY HAD NO INSTRUCTIONS FOR MACHINE CLEANING THE STOPCOCK DEVICES. THE CYSTOSCOPES HAD A CLEAR AND PROVEN WASHING PROCESS THAT HAD NOT BEEN CHANGED. IT WAS WHEN THEY CHANGED TO THE NEW STOPCOCK DEVICE THAT THE URINARY TRACT INFECTIONS APPEARED, THEREFORE IT IS THE LIKELY SOURCE OF THE INFECTIONS. THE CUSTOMER INDICATED THEY DID NOT KNOW IF THE STOPCOCKS HAD BE CULTURED. ADDITIONAL INFORMATION REGARDING EACH INDIVIDUAL PATIENT OUTCOME WAS REQUESTED BUT UNKNOWN BY THE CUSTOMER. THE CUSTOMER INDICATED THERE WERE FIVE STOPCOCKS INVOLVED, HOWEVER THEY COULD NOT TRACE WHICH STOPCOCK WAS USED FOR EACH OF THE FOUR INDIVIDUAL PAT
Patient problems: Sepsis; Urinary Tract Infection
MAUDE report 20323278 ↗InjurySep 27, 2024Device Reprocessing Problem; Contamination; Labelling, Instructions for Use or Training Problem; Device Reprocessing Problem; Contamination; Labelling, Instructions for Use or Training Problem
IT WAS REPORTED THE HEALTH CARE PROVIDER (HCP) NOTICED AN INCREASED NUMBER OF URINARY TRACT INFECTIONS IN PATIENTS AFTER CYSTOSCOPY PROCEDURES WHEN THE FACILITY STARTED USING THE 3-WAY STOPCOCK ON FLEXIBLE CYSTOSCOPES. THERE WERE FOUR PATIENTS AFFECTED AND THE PATIENTS WERE ADMITTED TO THE HOSPITAL THE WEEK AFTER THE PROCEDURE. THEY WERE DIAGNOSED WITH URINARY TRACT INFECTION AND SEPSIS. AT FIRST THE STOPCOCK DEVICES WERE REPROCESSED USING A THERMAL DISINFECTOR AND NOW THE FACILITY REPROCESSES THE DEVICE IN THE BASKET OF AN ETD4 REPROCESSOR. THE CUSTOMER INDICATED THEY HAD NO INSTRUCTIONS FOR MACHINE CLEANING THE STOPCOCK DEVICES. THE CYSTOSCOPES HAD A CLEAR AND PROVEN WASHING PROCESS THAT HAD NOT BEEN CHANGED. IT WAS WHEN THEY CHANGED TO THE NEW STOPCOCK DEVICE THAT THE URINARY TRACT INFECTIONS APPEARED, THEREFORE IT IS THE LIKELY SOURCE OF THE INFECTIONS. THE CUSTOMER INDICATED THEY DID NOT KNOW IF THE STOPCOCKS HAD BE CULTURED. ADDITIONAL INFORMATION REGARDING EACH INDIVIDUAL PATIENT OUTCOME WAS REQUESTED BUT UNKNOWN BY THE CUSTOMER. THE CUSTOMER INDICATED THERE WERE FIVE STOPCOCKS INVOLVED, HOWEVER THEY COULD NOT TRACE WHICH STOPCOCK WAS USED FOR EACH OF THE FOUR INDIVIDUAL PAT
Patient problems: Sepsis; Urinary Tract Infection
MAUDE report 20323254 ↗InjurySep 27, 2024Device Reprocessing Problem; Contamination; Labelling, Instructions for Use or Training Problem; Device Reprocessing Problem; Contamination; Labelling, Instructions for Use or Training Problem
IT WAS REPORTED THE HEALTH CARE PROVIDER (HCP) NOTICED AN INCREASED NUMBER OF URINARY TRACT INFECTIONS IN PATIENTS AFTER CYSTOSCOPY PROCEDURES WHEN THE FACILITY STARTED USING THE 3-WAY STOPCOCK ON FLEXIBLE CYSTOSCOPES. THERE WERE FOUR PATIENTS AFFECTED AND THE PATIENTS WERE ADMITTED TO THE HOSPITAL THE WEEK AFTER THE PROCEDURE. THEY WERE DIAGNOSED WITH URINARY TRACT INFECTION AND SEPSIS. AT FIRST THE STOPCOCK DEVICES WERE REPROCESSED USING A THERMAL DISINFECTOR AND NOW THE FACILITY REPROCESSES THE DEVICE IN THE BASKET OF AN ETD4 REPROCESSOR. THE CUSTOMER INDICATED THEY HAD NO INSTRUCTIONS FOR MACHINE CLEANING THE STOPCOCK DEVICES. THE CYSTOSCOPES HAD A CLEAR AND PROVEN WASHING PROCESS THAT HAD NOT BEEN CHANGED. IT WAS WHEN THEY CHANGED TO THE NEW STOPCOCK DEVICE THAT THE URINARY TRACT INFECTIONS APPEARED, THEREFORE IT IS THE LIKELY SOURCE OF THE INFECTIONS. THE CUSTOMER INDICATED THEY DID NOT KNOW IF THE STOPCOCKS HAD BE CULTURED. ADDITIONAL INFORMATION REGARDING EACH INDIVIDUAL PATIENT OUTCOME WAS REQUESTED BUT UNKNOWN BY THE CUSTOMER. THE CUSTOMER INDICATED THERE WERE FIVE STOPCOCKS INVOLVED, HOWEVER THEY COULD NOT TRACE WHICH STOPCOCK WAS USED FOR EACH OF THE FOUR INDIVIDUAL PAT
Patient problems: Sepsis; Urinary Tract Infection
MAUDE report 20323237 ↗InjurySep 27, 2024Device Reprocessing Problem; Contamination; Labelling, Instructions for Use or Training Problem; Device Reprocessing Problem; Contamination; Labelling, Instructions for Use or Training Problem
IT WAS REPORTED THE HEALTH CARE PROVIDER (HCP) NOTICED AN INCREASED NUMBER OF URINARY TRACT INFECTIONS IN PATIENTS AFTER CYSTOSCOPY PROCEDURES WHEN THE FACILITY STARTED USING THE 3-WAY STOPCOCK ON FLEXIBLE CYSTOSCOPES. THERE WERE FOUR PATIENTS AFFECTED AND THE PATIENTS WERE ADMITTED TO THE HOSPITAL THE WEEK AFTER THE PROCEDURE. THEY WERE DIAGNOSED WITH URINARY TRACT INFECTION AND SEPSIS. AT FIRST THE STOPCOCK DEVICES WERE REPROCESSED USING A THERMAL DISINFECTOR AND NOW THE FACILITY REPROCESSES THE DEVICE IN THE BASKET OF AN ETD4 REPROCESSOR. THE CUSTOMER INDICATED THEY HAD NO INSTRUCTIONS FOR MACHINE CLEANING THE STOPCOCK DEVICES. THE CYSTOSCOPES HAD A CLEAR AND PROVEN WASHING PROCESS THAT HAD NOT BEEN CHANGED. IT WAS WHEN THEY CHANGED TO THE NEW STOPCOCK DEVICE THAT THE URINARY TRACT INFECTIONS APPEARED, THEREFORE IT IS THE LIKELY SOURCE OF THE INFECTIONS. THE CUSTOMER INDICATED THEY DID NOT KNOW IF THE STOPCOCKS HAD BE CULTURED. ADDITIONAL INFORMATION REGARDING EACH INDIVIDUAL PATIENT OUTCOME WAS REQUESTED BUT UNKNOWN BY THE CUSTOMER. THE CUSTOMER INDICATED THERE WERE FIVE STOPCOCKS INVOLVED, HOWEVER THEY COULD NOT TRACE WHICH STOPCOCK WAS USED FOR EACH OF THE FOUR INDIVIDUAL PAT
Patient problems: Sepsis; Urinary Tract Infection
MAUDE report 20323177 ↗InjurySep 27, 2024Device Reprocessing Problem; Contamination; Labelling, Instructions for Use or Training Problem; Device Reprocessing Problem; Contamination; Labelling, Instructions for Use or Training Problem
IT WAS REPORTED THE HEALTH CARE PROVIDER (HCP) NOTICED AN INCREASED NUMBER OF URINARY TRACT INFECTIONS IN PATIENTS AFTER CYSTOSCOPY PROCEDURES WHEN THE FACILITY STARTED USING THE 3-WAY STOPCOCK ON FLEXIBLE CYSTOSCOPES. THERE WERE FOUR PATIENTS AFFECTED AND THE PATIENTS WERE ADMITTED TO THE HOSPITAL THE WEEK AFTER THE PROCEDURE. THEY WERE DIAGNOSED WITH URINARY TRACT INFECTION AND SEPSIS. AT FIRST THE STOPCOCK DEVICES WERE REPROCESSED USING A THERMAL DISINFECTOR AND NOW THE FACILITY REPROCESSES THE DEVICE IN THE BASKET OF AN ETD4 REPROCESSOR. THE CUSTOMER INDICATED THEY HAD NO INSTRUCTIONS FOR MACHINE CLEANING THE STOPCOCK DEVICES. THE CYSTOSCOPES HAD A CLEAR AND PROVEN WASHING PROCESS THAT HAD NOT BEEN CHANGED. IT WAS WHEN THEY CHANGED TO THE NEW STOPCOCK DEVICE THAT THE URINARY TRACT INFECTIONS APPEARED, THEREFORE IT IS THE LIKELY SOURCE OF THE INFECTIONS. THE CUSTOMER INDICATED THEY DID NOT KNOW IF THE STOPCOCKS HAD BE CULTURED. ADDITIONAL INFORMATION REGARDING EACH INDIVIDUAL PATIENT OUTCOME WAS REQUESTED BUT UNKNOWN BY THE CUSTOMER. THE CUSTOMER INDICATED THERE WERE FIVE STOPCOCKS INVOLVED, HOWEVER THEY COULD NOT TRACE WHICH STOPCOCK WAS USED FOR EACH OF THE FOUR INDIVIDUAL PAT
Patient problems: Sepsis; Urinary Tract Infection
MAUDE report 20323165 ↗
Other Endoscope, Ac-Powered And Accessories devices
- Olympus WA22810AOLYMPUS Winter & Ibe GmbH · Endoscope, Ac-Powered And Accessories2 recalls8 reports
- Olympus A22201DOLYMPUS Winter & Ibe GmbH · Endoscope, Ac-Powered And Accessories1 recall7 reports
- Olympus A22205DOLYMPUS Winter & Ibe GmbH · Endoscope, Ac-Powered And Accessories1 recall5 reports
- Olympus A22221COLYMPUS Winter & Ibe GmbH · Endoscope, Ac-Powered And Accessories1 recall1 report
- Olympus A22257COLYMPUS Winter & Ibe GmbH · Endoscope, Ac-Powered And Accessories1 recall1 report
- Olympus A22207COLYMPUS Winter & Ibe GmbH · Endoscope, Ac-Powered And Accessories1 recall1 report
- Olympus A22203COLYMPUS Winter & Ibe GmbH · Endoscope, Ac-Powered And Accessories1 recall0 reports
- Olympus A22223COLYMPUS Winter & Ibe GmbH · Endoscope, Ac-Powered And Accessories1 recall0 reports
Sources and updates
- Device record: FDA GUDID, file dated Oct 13, 2026 · View this device in AccessGUDID ↗
- Adverse event reports: FDA MAUDE, file dated Oct 14, 2026 · each report above links to its original FDA record
- Recalls: FDA Medical Device Recalls, file dated Oct 16, 2026
- Page last rebuilt: Oct 16, 2026. Data downloaded through openFDA, which notes it is not validated for clinical or regulatory use.
How reports and recalls are matched · Editorial policy · Report an error on this page