Product complaint # = > (b)(4) information regarding patient weight, height, medical history, race, and ethnicity was not reported.Section d2b ¿ procode: krd/hcg section e1.Initial reporter postal code: (b)(6) section e1.Initial reporter phone: (b)(6) section h3 - 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.Missing information from this report is identified as blank; this information was not provided in the reported event or available at the time of report submission.This report is being submitted pursuant to the provisions of 21 cfr, part 803 (and/or part 4, as applicable).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.
|
Product complaint # (b)(4).Updated sections on this medwatch: b4, g3, g6, h2, h3, h6 and h10.Complaint conclusion: as reported by the field, during the procedure, the physician filled the aneurysm with a presidio 10 cere 5mmx17cm coil ((b)(4)).It was found that the coil was unraveled/stretched.The physician retracted the coil and switched to a new one to complete the surgery.The microcatheter was not replaced.There was no patient injury reported.No additional information is available.A non-sterile presidio 10 cere 5mmx17cm was received contained in the decontamination pouch.Upon receiving the device, a visual inspection was performed, and it was noted that the coil was returned outside the introducer.Under magnification, the embolic coil was found to be stretched on the proximal portion.However, this remains attached to the resistance heating (rh), which was noted to be not softened.No other damages were noted in the device.The issue regarding the embolic coil being stretched was confirmed during the microscopical inspection.Coil stretching is a known potential issue associated with the use of this device.The instructions for use (ifu) provide proper handling instructions for the device to prevent such issues from occurring.According to the risk documentation, coil damage is a potential issue that can occur during microcoil placement due to the rotative hemostasis valve (rhv) being fastened too tightly and the introducer tip and microcatheter hub being misaligned.Also, friction and difficulty to advance are potential issues that can occur during microcoil placement due to continuous saline flush not being established, resulting in coil stretching.However, other factors not described in the event description may have contributed to the issue encountered during the procedure.With the limited information available, there is no indication that the issue reported in the complaint results from a defect inherently related to the device.As part of cerenovus quality process, all devices are manufactured, inspected, and released to approved specifications.Therefore, no capa activity is required.A manufacturing record evaluation was performed for the finished device 30404334 number, and no non-conformances related to the malfunction were identified.It should be noted that multiple factors could cause product failure.The instructions for use (ifu) contain the following precautions: ¿ if unusual friction is noticed during advancement or retraction of the microcoil system through the introducer, open the rhv main valve, and partially withdraw the distal end of the introducer to expose its tip within the rhv.Tighten the rhv main valve and flush the y-connector of the rhv with sterile saline and verify that fluid exits the slit in the clear portion of the introducer.¿ if unusual friction is still noticed during advancement or retraction of the microcoil system, verify flush lines are open and properly pressurized.Then slowly withdraw the entire microcoil system and examine for damage.Replace it with a new microcoil system.If friction still exists, withdraw and examine the delivery catheter system.¿if repositioning of the microcoil is necessary, carefully observe the motion of the microcoil in respect to the dpu wire while retracting the microcoil under fluoroscopy.If the microcoil movement is not one-to-one with the dpu wire, or if repositioning is difficult, the microcoil may have become stretched and could possibly break.Gently remove and discard the microcoil system.As part of the post market surveillance program, information from this complaint is trended to identify statistical signals for consideration of further correction action.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.A supplemental report will be submitted if new facts arise which materially alter information submitted in a previous mdr report.
|