• Decrease font size
  • Return font size to normal
  • Increase font size
U.S. Department of Health and Human Services

MAUDE Adverse Event Report: BOSTON SCIENTIFIC - GALWAY CAROTID WALLSTENT¿; STENT, CAROTID

  • Print
  • Share
  • E-mail
-
Super Search Devices@FDA
510(k) | DeNovo | Registration & Listing | Adverse Events | Recalls | PMA | HDE | Classification | Standards
CFR Title 21 | Radiation-Emitting Products | X-Ray Assembler | Medsun Reports | CLIA | TPLC
 

BOSTON SCIENTIFIC - GALWAY CAROTID WALLSTENT¿; STENT, CAROTID Back to Search Results
Model Number H965SCH647080
Device Problem Difficult to Advance (2920)
Patient Problem No Consequences Or Impact To Patient (2199)
Event Date 09/27/2017
Event Type  malfunction  
Manufacturer Narrative
(b)(4).Device evaluated by mfr.: the device was returned with the stent fully mounted onto the delivery system.The device was returned still loaded onto the customer¿s guide wire.During product analysis, the investigator attempted to load the customer¿s guide wire and a boston scientific guidewire through this device, however severe resistance was encountered and the device could not be loaded onto the guide wire.A visual and microscopic examination noted two small perforations on the catheter of the device distal to the guide wire exit port; this type of damage is consistent with excessive force being applied to the device and the guide wire exiting out through the catheter.This was supported as the investigator observed the guide wire exiting out through the perforated catheter when they attempted to load the device onto the guide wire.During analysis, it was also noted that guide wire bypassed the guide wire exit port and continued down the inner shaft, this indicates that the inner shaft and outer sheath were not patent which may have prevented the guide wire from passing through the guide wire exit port.A visual and microscopic examination identified no damage or any issues with the stent or tip of the device that could have contributed to the complaint incident.No other issues were identified during the product analysis.The manufacturing batch record review confirmed that the device met all material, assembly and performance specifications. the investigation conclusion is handling damage as the complaint was caused by handling of the device or portion of the device without direct patient contact.(b)(4).
 
Event Description
Reportable based on device analysis completed on 12-nov-2017.It was reported that difficulties tracking over the wire were encountered.The target lesion was located in the internal carotid artery.After a filter wire was advanced, an 8.0-29 carotid wallstent¿ was advanced to treat the lesion.However, the device was unable to advance over the filter wire and the filter wire did not exit the monorail port.The procedure was completed with another 8.0-29 carotid wallstent¿.No patient complications were reported.However, returned device analysis revealed perforations on the catheter of the device distal to the guide wire exit port.
 
Search Alerts/Recalls

  New Search  |  Submit an Adverse Event Report

Brand Name
CAROTID WALLSTENT¿
Type of Device
STENT, CAROTID
Manufacturer (Section D)
BOSTON SCIENTIFIC - GALWAY
Manufacturer (Section G)
BOSTON SCIENTIFIC - GALWAY
Manufacturer Contact
sonali arangil
one scimed place
maple grove, MN 55311
7634941700
MDR Report Key7082447
MDR Text Key93857109
Report Number2134265-2017-11679
Device Sequence Number1
Product Code NIM
Combination Product (y/n)N
Reporter Country CodeIT
PMA/PMN Number
P050019
Number of Events Reported1
Summary Report (Y/N)N
Report Source Manufacturer
Source Type company representative,foreig
Reporter Occupation Physician
Type of Report Initial
Report Date 11/12/2017
1 Device was Involved in the Event
1 Patient was Involved in the Event
Date FDA Received12/05/2017
Is this an Adverse Event Report? No
Is this a Product Problem Report? Yes
Device Operator Health Professional
Device Expiration Date12/15/2020
Device Model NumberH965SCH647080
Device Catalogue NumberSCH-64708
Was Device Available for Evaluation? Device Returned to Manufacturer
Date Returned to Manufacturer10/16/2017
Is the Reporter a Health Professional? Yes
Date Manufacturer Received11/12/2017
Was Device Evaluated by Manufacturer? Yes
Date Device Manufactured06/19/2017
Is the Device Single Use? Yes
Is This a Reprocessed and Reused Single-Use Device? No
Type of Device Usage Initial
Patient Sequence Number1
-
-