As reported, the "material fiber" of the sheath of a flexor ureteral access sheath and dilators set was exposed, interfering with the vision of an unspecified ureteroscope.No section of the device remained inside the patient's body.The patient did not require any additional procedures due to this occurrence.The complainant has not reported any adverse effects on the patient due to this occurrence.
|
Event description: as reported, during retrograde intrarenal surgery (rirs), the "material fiber" of the sheath of a flexor ureteral access sheath and dilators set was exposed, interfering with the vision of an unspecified ureteroscope.A flexible ureteroscope ( manufacturer and size of scope not provided) was inserted through the sheath during the procedure.A new sheath was used to complete the procedure.No section of the device remained inside the patient's body.The patient did not require any additional procedures due to this occurrence.The patient did not experience any adverse effects due to this occurrence.Investigation ¿ evaluation: a visual inspection of the returned device was conducted.A document based investigation was also performed including a review of complaint history, device history record (dhr), the instructions for use (ifu), and quality control procedures.One flexor ureteral access sheath and dilators set was returned in its original packaging.Inspection of the returned device noted: the inner lining of the sheath had peeled off, with strands of the sheath lining being visible outside the sheath.A review of the device history record found no non-conformances related to the reported failure mode.A review of complaint history records shows no other complaints associated with the complaint device lot.Because there were no related non-conformances, adequate inspection activities have been established, there is objective evidence that the dhr was fully executed, and no other lot related complaints that have been received from the field, it was concluded that there is no evidence that nonconforming product exists in house or in the field.A review of relevant manufacturing and quality control documents was conducted.All devices are inspected for damage.Cook has concluded that sufficient inspection activities are in place to identify this failure mode prior to distribution.The instructions for use (ifu), does not provide any information related to the reported issue.The inner lining of the sheath was most likely damaged from contact with other devices used during the procedure.Per the quality engineering risk assessment, no further action is required.The appropriate personnel have been notified, and we will continue to monitor for similar complaints.This report is required by the fda under 21 cfr part 803.This report is based on unconfirmed information submitted by others.Neither the submission of this report nor any statement made in it is intended to be an admission that any cook device is defective or malfunctioned; that a death or serious injury occurred; or that any cook device caused or contributed to; or is likely to cause or contribute to a death or serious injury if a malfunction occurred.
|