|
Model Number 532598B |
Device Problem
Detachment of Device or Device Component (2907)
|
Patient Problem
No Clinical Signs, Symptoms or Conditions (4582)
|
Event Date 11/01/2022 |
Event Type
Injury
|
Manufacturer Narrative
|
A review of the manufacturing documentation associated with lot 18127005 presented no issues during the manufacturing process that can be related to the reported event.Additional information is pending and will be submitted within 30 days upon receipt.
|
|
Event Description
|
As reported, a 5f pigtail 110cm 6sh (sideholes) super torque catheter separated most probably up to the last marker spot and all the markers have broken off when removing after using an unknown high-pressure machine at first run.When the broken pigtail tip was looked at the markers have also migrated, and did not dislodge but it was unsure if this was at the time when they were trying to non-cordis snare the tip out or before everything happened.Another unknown catheter was used successfully to complete the procedure.The procedure was completed successfully without patient injury.The device was stored, handled, and prepped per the instructions for use (ifu).There were no anomalies noted when removed from the package.The intended procedure was an endovascular aneurysm repair (evar).The device was not inserted through a stopcock instead of a hemostatic valve.There was no resistance met while advancing the device.The lesion was not calcified nor was there vessel tortuosity or vessel angulation.The device was not used for a chronic total occlusion (total occlusion >3 months).There was no excessive torqueing required.The device was not kinked in the area of separation.The device will not be returned for evaluation.
|
|
Event Description
|
As reported, a 5f pigtail 110cm 6sh (sideholes) super torque catheter separated most probably up to the last marker spot and all the markers have broken off when removing after using another company high-pressure machine at first run.When the broken pigtail tip was looked at the markers have also migrated and did not dislodge but it was unsure if this was at the time when they were trying to non-cordis snare the tip out or before everything happened.Another unknown catheter was used successfully to complete the procedure.The procedure was completed successfully without patient injury.The device was stored, handled, and prepped per the instructions for use (ifu).There were no anomalies noted when removed from the package.There was no damage seen on the product before the procedure.The intended procedure was an endovascular aneurysm repair (evar).The device was not inserted through a stopcock instead of a hemostatic valve.There was no resistance met while advancing the device.The lesion was not calcified nor was there vessel tortuosity or vessel angulation.The device was not used for a chronic total occlusion (total occlusion >3 months).There was no excessive torquing required.The device was not kinked in the area of separation.The device will not be returned for evaluation.
|
|
Manufacturer Narrative
|
Complaint conclusion: as reported, a 5f pigtail 110cm 6sh (sideholes) super torque catheter separated most probably up to the last marker spot and all the markers have broken off when removing after using another company high-pressure machine at first run.When the broken pigtail tip was looked at the markers have also migrated and did not dislodge but it was unsure if this was at the time when they were trying to non-cordis snare the tip out or before everything happened.Another unknown catheter was used successfully to complete the procedure.The procedure was completed successfully without patient injury.The device was stored, handled, and prepped per the instructions for use (ifu).There were no anomalies noted when removed from the package.There was no damage seen on the product before the procedure.The intended procedure was an endovascular aneurysm repair (evar).The device was not inserted through a stopcock instead of a hemostatic valve.There was no resistance met while advancing the device.The lesion was not calcified nor was there vessel tortuosity or vessel angulation.The device was not used for a chronic total occlusion (total occlusion >3 months).There was no excessive torquing required.The device was not kinked in the area of separation.The product was not returned for analysis.A product history record (phr) review of lot 18127005 revealed no anomalies or non-conformances during the manufacturing and inspection processes that can be associated with the reported event.Without the return of the device the reported ¿catheter (body/shaft)-separated in patient¿ could not be confirmed or further clarified.Procedural factors such as entrapment during an evar procedure may have contributed to the reported event.According to the instructions for use (ifu), although not intended as a mitigation of risk, ¿manipulation of the catheter under excessive friction due to interaction with other devices or while trapped in the vasculature, can lead to stretching or elongation of the catheter.Stretching or elongation of the catheter during endovascular procedures could result in the marker bands moving along the catheter.In extreme cases, marker bands may come off the catheter and dislodge into the vascular system.Avoid entrapment of the catheter between other endovascular devices and the vessel wall.Avoid excessive friction on the catheter; avoid simultaneous introduction of the catheter and aortic graft devices through the same sheath.¿ the use of the super torque mb catheter in procedures where entrapment of the catheter between endovascular devices and the vessel wall may occur, for example endovascular aortic repair (evar) procedures, is contraindicated.Based on the information available and the phr review, there is no indication that the event is related to the device design or manufacturing process.Therefore, no preventative or corrective actions will be taken at this time.
|
|
Search Alerts/Recalls
|
|
|