The healthcare professional reported that during an endovascular embolization procedure, a microcatheter was used to deliver the complaint device, a 4mm x 23mm enterprise 2 stent (encr402312 / 7161646) but the physician encountered a lot of resistance.The stent was impeded in the microcatheter and could not be retracted.The stent and the microcatheter were removed and a new stent was used to complete the procedure.There was no negative patient impact.
|
Manufacturer¿s ref.No: (b)(4).Initial reporter name and address: phone: (b)(6).The device is available to be returned for evaluation and testing.However, it has not been received to date as indicated as ¿other¿ in this section as the reason for non-evaluation.If the device returns, a device investigation will be performed.(b)(4) medical performed a review of the device history records relative to the manufacturing, inspection, and packaging of the lot: 7161646.The history record indicates this product was final inspection tested at (b)(4) medical and was determined to be acceptable.This report is being submitted pursuant to the provisions of 21 cfr, part 803.This report may be based on information which has not been investigated or verified prior to the required reporting date.This report does not reflect a conclusion by cerenovus, or its employees that the report constitutes an admission that the product, cerenovus, or its employees caused or contributed to the potential event described in this report.If information is obtained that was not available for the initial report, a follow-up report will be filed as appropriate.The manufacturer will submit a supplemental report if new facts arise which materially alter information submitted in a previous mdr report.Additional information will be submitted within 30 days of receipt.
|
Manufacturer¿s ref.No: (b)(4).The purpose of this mdr submission is to report the investigational finding of the returned device.[conclusion]: the healthcare professional reported that during an endovascular embolization procedure, a microcatheter was used to deliver the complaint device, a 4mm x 23mm enterprise 2 stent (encr402312 / 7161646) but the physician encountered a lot of resistance.The stent was impeded in the microcatheter and could not be retracted.The stent and the microcatheter were removed and a new stent was used to complete the procedure.There was no negative patient impact.Additional information related to the procedure and the reported device issue were not available.If additional information is received at a later date, this complaint file will be updated accordingly.The complaint device was returned for evaluation and analysis.The investigation finding is documented below.Investigation summary: a non-sterile 4mm x 23mm enterprise 2 stent was received contained in the decontamination pouch.Visual inspection was performed.The stent component was observed already detached from the complaint device and not included in the product return.The delivery wire and the introducer were observed to be in good condition (i.E., no kinks, no fractures, and no separation).The issue documented in the complaint that the stent became impeded in the microcatheter could not be evaluated through functional testing since the stent was already detached.The stent detachment was not originally documented in the complaint and the exact time when this condition occurred cannot be determined, the complaint event documented that the stent and the microcatheter were removed, but there was not report of further device damage.It is possible that clinical and procedural factors, including device manipulation and vessel characteristics, may have contributed to the reported failure.However, with the limited information available, the root cause remains speculative, and the customer complaint cannot be evaluated.There is no indication that the issue reported in the complaint results from a defect inherently related to the device.Lake region medical performed a review of the device history records relative to the manufacturing, inspection, and packaging of the lot 7161646.The history record indicates this product was final inspection tested at lake region medical and was determined to be acceptable.As part of the cerenovus quality process, all devices are manufactured, inspected, and released to approved specifications.It should be noted that product failure could be caused by multiple factors.The instruction for use (ifu) does contain the following recommendation: do not apply undue force if resistance is encountered at any point during stent manipulation.Withdraw the unit and advance to a new one.Based on the manufacturing documentation review, there is no indication that the event is related to the device manufacturing process.As part of the post market surveillance program, information from this complaint is trended for statistical signals and corrective / preventive action may be triggered at a later time.Since there was no evidence to suggest the event was related to a manufacturing or design issue, no corrective actions will be taken at this time.The manufacturer will submit a supplemental report if new facts arise which materially alter information submitted in a previous mdr report.Additional information will be submitted within 30 days of receipt.
|