During a bilateral stent placement, the tether stretched and broke inside the patient.Tether was removed from patient using a grasper.A section of the device did not remain inside the patient¿s body.According to the initial reporter, the patient did not require any additional procedures nor experience any adverse effects due to this occurrence.
|
(b)(4).Additional information: a maude report was received and has been attached to this record investigation - evaluation a review of the complaint history, drawings, device history record, documentation, instructions for use (ifu), specifications and trends was conducted during the investigation.The device is shipped with an instruction for use (ifu) that describes the intended use, specific items are addressed such as: cautions the user not to force components during removal or replacement.The complaint device was not returned therefore, no physical examinations could be performed; however, a document based investigation evaluation was performed.The device history record was reviewed and there was no evidence to indicate this device was not manufactured in accordance to current specifications.There were no nonconforming events which could contribute to this failure mode.However, based on the information provided, and no product returned, the root cause is unable to be determined or reported at this time.It is possible that the user exerted too much force while removing the stent.We continue to monitor for similar complaints.Per the quality engineering risk assessment no further action is required.
|
During a bilateral stent placement, the tether stretched and broke inside the patient.Tether was removed from patient using a grasper.A section of the device did not remain inside the patient's body.According to the initial reporter, the patient did not require any additional procedures nor experience any adverse effects due to this occurrence.
|