|
Catalog Number RBY4C0835 |
Device Problems
Physical Resistance/Sticking (4012); Premature Separation (4045)
|
Patient Problem
No Clinical Signs, Symptoms or Conditions (4582)
|
Event Date 02/09/2024 |
Event Type
malfunction
|
Manufacturer Narrative
|
The device has been returned and the investigation results are pending.A follow up mdr will be submitted upon completion of the device investigation.
|
|
Event Description
|
The patient was undergoing a coil embolization procedure in the left subclavian artery using ruby coils, a packing coil (pc), and a non-penumbra microcatheter.It should be noted that the patient¿s anatomy was mildly tortuous.During the procedure, the physician successfully implanted three ruby coils and one pc into the target vessel using the microcatheter.While advancing another ruby coil through the proximal length of the microcatheter, the physician experienced resistance and the ruby coil would not advance any further.While attempting to remove the ruby coil, the coil unintentionally detached within the microcatheter.Therefore, the microcatheter containing the detached ruby coil was removed.It was reported that the ruby coil was flushed out of the microcatheter.The procedure was completed using a new ruby coil and the same microcatheter.There was no report of an adverse effect to the patient.
|
|
Manufacturer Narrative
|
Evaluation of the returned ruby coil confirmed that the embolization coil was detached.Evaluation revealed that the pet lock was separated on the proximal end of the pusher assembly, the pull wire was retracted out of the distal tip of the pusher assembly.If this occurs, the embolization coil will detach from its pusher assembly.This typically occurs during a successful detachment attempt, and therefore, the root cause of the reported complaint cannot be determined.Further evaluation revealed kinks along the length of the pusher assembly and the detached embolization had offset coil winds along its length.This damage was incidental to the reported complaint and may have occurred during packaging of the device for return to penumbra.Due to the returned condition, the ruby coil was unable to be functionally tested.Therefore, the root cause of the reported resistance during the procedure could not be determined.Penumbra coils are visually inspected during in-process inspection and during quality inspection after manufacturing.The manufacturing records for this lot were reviewed and did not reveal any outstanding discrepancies, design, or quality concerns.
|
|
Search Alerts/Recalls
|
|
|