|
Model Number 181347CS-V-A1-CN |
Device Problem
Premature Separation (4045)
|
Patient Problem
No Clinical Signs, Symptoms or Conditions (4582)
|
Event Date 01/18/2024 |
Event Type
malfunction
|
Event Description
|
It was reported, renal artery segment aneurysm, 24 x 20 in size.The peripheral guide wire and microcatheter were in place, and the 20 x 50 and 20 x 50 coils were filled in.When pushing the third coil 13 x 47, the resistance of the coil in the microcatheter was high, and it could not be pushed forward.When retracting the coil, the coil broke in the microcatheter, causing both the microcatheter and the coil to be scrapped.After replaced the new microcatheter and coil, the procedure ended normally.There was no patient injury.It was reported that the status of the patient was normal.
|
|
Manufacturer Narrative
|
The device was stated to be available for return to the manufacturer for evaluation, but has not yet been returned.The alleged product issue/event as described could not be confirmed.If the device is received at a later date, an investigation will be performed and a supplemental mdr will be submitted.A search for non-conformances associated with this part/lot number combination did not reveal any production-related issues relevant to the complaint that occurred during manufacturing of the device.
|
|
Manufacturer Narrative
|
The investigation of the returned coil system found the pusher strain relief damaged, the pusher twisted at the attachment area, and the implant to be separated from the pusher.The microcatheter used in the procedure with the coil system was returned cut at 16cm from the proximal end of strain relief.Only the portion of the microcatheter proximal to the cut was returned for evaluation.No implant was found within the returned portion of the microcatheter.The investigation found the pusher¿s monofilament with a tensile break shape at the tip, which is consistent with the device experiencing force that exceeded the strength of the monofilament causing the implant to separate from the pusher.The physical evaluation of the device could not identify the conditions or circumstances that led to the pusher damage, but the damage is consistent with the device experiencing forces over specification.As the microcatheter was returned cut and the distal section of the microcatheter was not returned for evaluation, this investigation could not determine if a condition existed on the microcatheter that would have caused or contributed to the reported complaint.
|
|
Event Description
|
No additional information received.
|
|
Search Alerts/Recalls
|
|
|