Nouvelle déclaration d'incident
No de la demande: 2019-6279
Numéro de référence du titulaire d'homologation: 2019-US-016990
Nom du titulaire (nom légal complet, aucune abbréviation): The Hartz Mountain Corporation
Adresse: 400 Plaza Drive
Ville: Secaucus
État: New Jersey
Pays: USA
Code postal /Zip: 07094-3688
Incident chez un animal domestique
Pays: UNITED STATES
État: OHIO
ARLA No d'homologation ARLA No de la demande d'homologation EPA No d'homologation. 2596-83
Nom du produit: Hartz UltraGuard Flea and Tick Collar for Cats and Kittens
Autre (préciser)
CollarOui
Inconnu
Site: Animal / Usage sur un animal domestique
Propriétaire de l'animal
Cat / Chat
Domestic Longhair
1
Femme
4
5
lbs
Cutanée
>24 hrs <=3 days / >24 h <=3 jours
>24 hrs <=3 days / >24 h <=3 jours
Système
Persisted until death
Non
Non
Mort
Treatment / Traitement
(p.ex. description des symptômes tels que la fréquence et la gravité
On 21-Jul-2019 the pet owner applied one Hartz UltraGuard Flea and Tick Collar for Cats and Kittens (Tetrachlorvinphos) to the cat. On 24-Jul-2019 the cat was found vocalizing and then died shortly thereafter (exact amount of time not specified). No veterinary intervention occurred and it is unknown if the owner pursued a necropsy.
Mort
Assessment: This product is considered to have a wide margin of safety in cats. If a small amount of product was ingested, only minor oral irritation or gastrointestinal upset resulting in drooling of vomiting would be expected. Sudden onset of vocalization and death are not expected and not likely due to product use. Other causes including unknown trauma, underlying cardiac disease and aortic thromboembolism (saddle thrombus) should be considered. The information contained in this report is based on self-reported statements provided to the registrant during telephone Interview(s). These self-reported descriptions of an incident have not been independently verified to be factually correct or complete descriptions of the incident. For that reason, information contained in this report does not and cannot form the basis for a determination of whether the reported clinical effects are causally related to exposure to the product identified in the telephone interviews.