Catalog Number ENC452212 |
Device Problem
Premature Activation (1484)
|
Patient Problem
No Clinical Signs, Symptoms or Conditions (4582)
|
Event Date 01/24/2024 |
Event Type
malfunction
|
Manufacturer Narrative
|
Manufacturer¿s ref.No: (b)(4).Information regarding patient identifier, date of birth, weight, race, and ethnicity were not provided.Section e.1: the initial reporter phone: (b)(6).The initial reporter email address was not available / reported.Section h.3: the device is available to be returned for evaluation and testing.However, it has not been received to date as indicated as ¿other¿ in this section as the reason for non-evaluation.If the device returns, a device investigation will be performed.Lake region medical performed a review of the device history records relative to the manufacturing, inspection, and packaging of the lot 8470635.The history record indicates this product was final inspection tested at lake region medical and was determined to be acceptable.This report is being submitted pursuant to the provisions of 21 cfr, part 803.This report may be based on information which has not been investigated or verified prior to the required reporting date.This report does not reflect a conclusion by cerenovus, or its employees that the report constitutes an admission that the product, cerenovus, or its employees caused or contributed to the potential event described in this report.If information is obtained that was not available for the initial report, a follow-up report will be filed as appropriate.Missing information from this report is identified as blank; this information was not provided in the reported event or available at the time of report submission.The manufacturer will submit a supplemental report if new facts arise which materially alter information submitted in a previous mdr report.Additional information will be submitted within 30 days of receipt.
|
|
Event Description
|
The healthcare professional reported that during an angioplasty procedure, the physician opened the device packaging for the 4.5mm x 22mm enterprise® vascular reconstruction device (b)(6) and removed the device from the dispenser hoop, it was found that the stent component was already released.The stent body was prematurely separated from the delivery wire.The device was not used in the patient.The physician replaced the device to complete the procedure.There was no negative patient impact.On 17-feb-2024, additional information was received.Per the information, the patient is a 47-year-old female.Prior to use, it was noted that the stent was observed to be ¿swaying in the system and was abnormal, so the stent fell directly out of the system.¿ it was replaced with another 4.5mm x 22mm enterprise® vascular reconstruction device (b)(6) there was no clinically significant delay as a result of the reported issue.
|
|
Manufacturer Narrative
|
Manufacturer¿s ref.No: (b)(4).The purpose of this mdr submission is to report the investigational finding of the returned device.The complaint product was returned and received for evaluation and analysis.The investigation is documented below.Investigation summary: a non-sterile 4.5mm x 22mm enterprise® vascular reconstruction device was received contained in the decontamination pouch.Visual inspection was performed.It was noted that the stent was already detached from the unit.The delivery wire and the introducer were in good condition (i.E., no kinks, no bends, nor elongations).Microscopic inspection was performed on the stent component.It was observed to be in good condition; there was no structural damage (i.E., no broken struts, no kinks); also, it was noted fully expanded, both ends can be noted as completely flared.Dimensional analysis was performed on the delivery wire.All measurements were found to be within specifications, including the specifications that control the attachment and delivery of the stent.Therefore, device failure is not suspected to be a contributing factor.The issue documented in the complaint regarding a premature deployment of the stent during the removal from the hoop was confirmed due to the detached condition of the stent.However, the dimensional analysis performed showed no issues that could have resulted in the premature detachment of the stent.With the information available, the root cause of the failure encountered cannot be determined.It is possible that clinical and procedural factors, including device manipulation, may have contributed to the reported failure.There is no indication that the issues reported in the complaint result from a defect inherently related to the enterprise device.Lake region medical performed a review of the device history records relative to the manufacturing, inspection, and packaging of the lot 8470635.The history record indicates this product was final inspection tested at lake region medical and was determined to be acceptable.As part of the cerenovus quality process, all devices are manufactured, inspected, and released to approved specifications.It should be noted that product failure could be caused by multiple factors.The instructions for use (ifu) does contain the following recommendations: do not partially deploy the stent from the introducer.Carefully place the dispenser hoop into the sterile field.Confirm that the delivery wire does not move relative to the introducer during the removal of the cerenovus enterprise vascular reconstruction device and delivery system from the dispenser hoop.Confirm the tip of the delivery wire is entirely within the introducer.Based on the manufacturing documentation review, there is no indication that the event is related to the device manufacturing process.As part of the post market surveillance program, information from this complaint is trended for statistical signals and corrective / preventive action may be triggered at a later time.Since there was no evidence to suggest the event was related to a manufacturing or design issue, no corrective actions will be taken at this time.The manufacturer will submit a supplemental report if new facts arise which materially alter information submitted in a previous mdr report.Additional information will be submitted within 30 days of receipt.
|
|
Manufacturer Narrative
|
Manufacturer¿s ref.No: (b)(4).The purpose of this mdr submission is to report that the product analysis lab received the complaint device on 23-feb-2024.A supplemental 3500a report will be submitted once the product investigation has been completed.The manufacturer will submit a supplemental report if new facts arise which materially alter information submitted in a previous mdr report.Additional information will be submitted within 30 days of receipt.
|
|
Search Alerts/Recalls
|
|