|
Model Number M00562402 |
Device Problems
Entrapment of Device (1212); Failure to Cut (2587)
|
Patient Problem
No Consequences Or Impact To Patient (2199)
|
Event Date 05/01/2019 |
Event Type
Injury
|
Manufacturer Narrative
|
Lot #, expiration date, manufacture date: the complainant was unable to provide the suspect device lot number; therefore, the lot expiration and device manufacture dates are unknown.However, the complainant reported that the device was not expired.(b)(4).The device has not been received for analysis; therefore, a failure analysis of the complaint device could not be completed.If any further relevant information is identified, a supplemental medwatch will be filed.
|
|
Event Description
|
It was reported to boston scientific corporation that a captiflex medium oval flexible snare was used during a colonoscopy procedure performed on (b)(6) 2019.According to the complainant, during the procedure, the snare loop failed to cut a 3cm large polyp and became embedded in the tissue.The snare loop could not either open back fully or lift back off of the polyp.Reportedly, the snare was cut below the handle with a pair of scissors and the snare loop was cut using an endoloop cutter, however, it was unable to cut the snare loop.They went back with another captiflex snare and was able to cut the target polyp and remove the snare loop.There were no patient complications reported as a result of this event.The patient condition following the procedure was reported to be fine.
|
|
Event Description
|
It was reported to boston scientific corporation that a captiflex medium oval flexible snare was used during a colonoscopy procedure performed on (b)(6) 2019.According to the complainant, during the procedure, the snare loop failed to cut a 3cm large polyp and became embedded in the tissue.The snare loop could not either open back fully or lift back off of the polyp.Reportedly, the snare was cut below the handle with a pair of scissors and the snare loop was cut using an endoloop cutter, however, it was unable to cut the snare loop.They went back with another captiflex snare and was able to cut the target polyp and remove the snare loop.There were no patient complications reported as a result of this event.The patient condition following the procedure was reported to be fine.
|
|
Manufacturer Narrative
|
Block d4, h4: the complainant was unable to provide the suspect device lot number; therefore, the lot expiration and device manufacture dates are unknown.However, the complainant reported that the device was not expired.Block h6: problem code 1212 captures the reportable event of snare loop embedded in patient's tissue.Block h10: the device was received cut in two parts (one was the handle and the other was the working length).Visual analysis of the returned device revealed that the device had flare detached.In addition, the catheter had several kinks and the loop was bent.It is most likely that the working length detachment was caused by the kinks found on the catheter, since, when the catheter is kinked, the friction between the wire and the catheter causes difficulty when actuating the device and eventually, the working length detaches from the handle.Likely the failures (working length kinks and flare detachment) caused resistance and difficulties during the procedure when attempting to cut the polyp.Based on the information available and the analysis performed, the investigation conclusion code for the encountered damages will be documented as "adverse event related to procedure." on the other hand, the reported failure "loop entrapment of device or device component" cannot be confirmed since this issue could not be replicated and verified under anatomical conditions.Therefore, the reported issue of "loop entrapment of device or device component" will be documented as "no problem detected" since the device complaint or problem cannot be confirmed.A manufacturing batch record review was unable to be performed as the lot number is unknown.However, a ship history review was performed to identify the most probable lots, and a dhr history review on the most probable lots did not identify any deviations within manufacturing/service processes that could have contributed to the event.
|
|
Search Alerts/Recalls
|
|
|